Novel traction systems for sustainable railway

futures in LICs
Final Report

February 2023
HVT/038
This research was funded by UKAID through the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office under
the High-Volume Transport Applied Research Programme, managed by DT Global.

The views expressed in this [leaflet/paper/report/other] do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s
official policies.

Reference No. HVT/038

Lead Organisation/ Consultant University of Birmingham
Partner Organisation(s)/
Consultant(s)
Title Novel traction systems for sustainable railway futures in LICs
Type of document Project Report
Theme Low carbon transport
Sub-theme Climate Change: Adaptation and Mitigation
Marcelo Blumenfeld
Tajud Din
Author(s)
Stuart Hillmansen
Clive Roberts
Lead contact Clive Roberts ([email protected])
Geographical Location(s) Sub-Saharan Africa
Abstract
The project HVT/038, named Novel Traction Systems for Sustainable Futures in LICs, was set to
investigate the feasibility and potential implementation of alternative technologies to railway
electrification in low-income countries (LICs) in Sub-Saharan Africa. The ambitious research builds on a
challenging context of growing pressures to decarbonise the transport sector, which are accompanied by
financing constraints in developing countries. This final report compiles all research outputs and activities
from the project, and sets out further steps to increase research uptake and potential pathways to
commercialisation.
Railways, decarbonisation, Rail transport, low carbon, hydrogen trains,
Keywords
Sub-Saharan Africa, low-income countries
Funding
Acknowledgements

Issue Status Author(s) Reviewed By Approved By Issue Date

Marcelo Blumenfeld
Tajud Din
1 Draft 30/11/2022
Stuart Hillmansen
Clive Roberts
Marcelo Blumenfeld
Final 24/02/2023
Tajud Din
FINAL REPORT

CONTENTS

Section 1: Background to the project 5

1. Context 5
2. Aims and objectives 6
3. Methodology 6
4. Scope 7
Section 2: Traffic volume analysis 8
1. Update on the State of Knowledge (SoK) 8
2. Scenario analysis 10
2.1 African Vision 11
2.2 Renewed links 13
2.3 Private railways 13
2.4 Forgotten tracks 14
3. Selection of case studies 15
Section 3: Capability analyses 17
1. Single train simulator graphical user interface tool 17
2. Route analysis 19
Section 4: Architectural design 23
1. Revision of case studies 23
2. Details of the rolling stock configuration 23
2.1 Kampala – Namanve line 23
2.2 Dar es Salaam – Kigoma line 24
2.3 Abuja – Kaduna line 25
2.4 Volumetric analysis 26
Section 5: Retrofitting analysis 29
1. Introduction 29
1.1 Recent developments in Tanzania 29
1.2 Current fleet and infrastructure 29
2. Analysis of concepts of operations (CONOPs) 30
2.1 Key elements of CONOPs 30
2.2 Simulation Results 33
2.3 Hydrogen Production & Refuelling strategies 35
2.4 Added hydrogens wagons 38
3. Overall Comparative analysis of all CONOPs 38
4. Pathways for decarbonising an existing railway in low-income countries in SSA 38
Section 6: Conclusion and further steps 42
Section 7: Dissemination activities 44
Section 8: References 48

i
FINAL REPORT

TABLES
Table 1: List of countries within the scope of the project [9, 10] 7
Table 2: Data currency for countries (and international routes) within the study scope 10
Table 3. List of selected case studies 16
Table 4. Configuration used for each case study 20
Table 5. Summary of fuel requirements and respective emissions for each route studied 21
Table 6. Revised list of case studies 23
Table 7. Components considered for volumetric analysis 26
Table 8. Summary of volumetric analysis for alternative traction systems in each case study 27
Table 9: Components removed from the diesel train and the components added to the hybrid train 30
Table 10: 11 wagon formation with one locomotive 31
Table 11: 15 wagons formation with one locomotive 32
Table 12: 11 wagons formation with two locomotives 32
Table 13: 15 wagons formation with two locomotive 32
Table 14: 11 Wagons formation of retrofitted trains with one locomotive 33
Table 15: 15 Wagons formation of retrofitted trains with one locomotive 34
Table 16: 11 Wagons formation of retrofitted trains with two locomotive 34
Table 17: 15 Wagons formation of retrofitted trains with two locomotive 35
Table 18: Estimated costs of equipment required in production of hydrogen 36
Table 19: Estimated costs of operation and maintenance wind turbine, solar farm and electrolyser 37
Table 20: Estimated costs for retrofitting the hydrogen hybrid locomotive 37
Table 21: Pros and Cons of the different forms of traction systems 39
Table 22. Attendance list of key stakeholder workshop in January 2021 45
Table 23. Attendance list of steering board meeting in May 2021 45
Table 24. List of participants of the Short Course on Railway Decarbonisation 47

ii
FINAL REPORT

FIGURES
Figure 1. Overall project methodology 6
Figure 2: Different track gauges in use in Sub-Saharan Africa (adapted from Creative Commons) [11] 8
Figure 3: Scenarios used for analysis 11
Figure 4: Proposed High-Speed Rail Network of the AU Agenda 2063 [32] 12
Figure 5: Future scenarios and their trajectories in selected themes 15
Figure 6: Screenshot of STS GUI 18
Figure 7: Photos of representative rolling stock used for simulations - (a) Uganda; (b) Liberia; (c) Tanzania; (d)
Nigeria 20
Figure 8: Illustrative Example of a ULR vehicle 24
Figure 9. External view of an EMD GT22C-3M locomotive [49] 25
Figure 10. An illustrative example of a GE U26 locomotive 26
Figure 11. Flyer for Short Course on Railway Decarbonisation 46
Figure 12. Photos from the Short Course on Railway Decarbonisation 47

iii
FINAL REPORT

ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS
BCRRE Birmingham Centre for Railway Research and Education

CDN Northern Development Corridor

CEAR Central East African Railways

CONOPs Concepts of operations

EMU Electric Multiple Unit

GNI Gross National Income

HDI Human Development Index

HVT High Volume Transport

IP Intellectual Property

IGBT Insulated-gate bipolar transistor

kW Kilo Watt

LIC Low-income countries

RDC Railroad Development Corporation

RSSB Rail Safety and Standards Board

SDG Sustainable Development Goals

SGR Standard Gauge Railway

SMR Steam Methan Reformation

SoK State of Knowledge

STS Single Train Simulator

UIC International Union of Railways

UKRRIN UK Rail Research and Innovation Network

ULR Ultra-light Rail

iv
FINAL REPORT

SECTION 1: BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT

1. Context
As the world enters the 21st century, the environmental impact of human activities is becoming an urgent
matter to avoid irreparable damage. This includes the transport sector, which is one of the greatest pollutant
emitters and energy consumers globally. According to the International Energy Agency, transport is
responsible for 24% of direct CO2 emissions from fuel combustion. Road vehicles – cars, trucks, buses and
two- and three-wheelers – account for nearly three-quarters of transport CO2 emissions.
Moreover, as the global transport sector relies on fossil fuels for 92% of its energy, it is a considerable
challenge to change energy paradigms whilst still supporting economic growth. Such over reliance on fossil
fuels is seen as a time bomb that will hinder the ability of countries and regions to prosper under constrained
energy conditions. This is a particular issue in low-income countries (LICs) in Sub-Saharan Africa, where road
transport carries more than 80% of the goods and 90% of the passengers.
It is not surprising that many countries have started ambitious programmes for decarbonisation to move
away from their heavy dependence on fossil fuels. The matter is taken with high priority at a global scale. At
least four of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SGDs) relate directly with the reduction of
carbon emissions and energy consumption for more resilient societies.
Rail transport is therefore returning to a priority position in the sector, since it is one of the most sustainable
modes of transport. Railways have the potential to reduce external costs of transport by at least 47.5% per
passenger-km and 75.4% per tonne-km when compared to road modes. Furthermore, rail freight produces
between 75% and 85% less greenhouse gas emissions per transport unit when compared to articulated trucks
[1].
However, there is both an infrastructure and financial challenge in LICs in Sub-Saharan Africa. In these
countries, most of the railway transport in Sub-Saharan Africa is still carried by combustion engines, and the
electrification of lines seems a far-fetched vision. Less than 15% of the almost 80,000km of railway lines in
Africa are electrified, spread across only eight countries. In fact, if South Africa is not counted, then only 6% of
the railways are electrified [2]. In Sub-Saharan Africa, the only countries which have electrified railway lines
are the Democratic Republic of Congo (858km) and Ethiopia (760km) [3]. Firstly, electrifying railway lines
involves significant investments. Costs can range from £100,000 per kilometre in India to over £2,000,000 in
European countries [3, 4]. Adding these amounts to the ongoing costs of building new lines and renewing
existing routes could prove an unfeasible reality to most LICs.
Secondly, the general production and availability of electricity in Sub-Saharan Africa is very low when
compared to other regions. According to the World Bank, only 23% of the population has access to electricity
[5]. In rural regions, less than one in ten inhabitants have such access. Considering that 2,500 kW is necessary
to haul a train of 2,000 tonnes [6], efforts to electrify the railways in low-income countries would also have to
include the capital investments of establishing power grids that are robust enough to cope with the high
demands that can be of 0.05KWh per tonne-km and 0b.1KWh per passenger-km [8]. In turn, demands can be
as high as 605MWh for the current traffic of Mozambique [8].
It logically follows that the decarbonisation route taken by high-income countries, namely the electrification
of railway networks, seems unfeasible and uneconomic to low-income countries unless in a few main
corridors. These countries currently operate traffic volumes that could not promote a justifiable investment in
power grids to feed the railway network, especially at times when alternative traction systems are gaining
momentum.

5
FINAL REPORT

2. Aims and objectives

Therefore, the research project was set with an aim to explore cost-effective traction solutions for sustainable
railway futures in Sub-Saharan low-income countries. Investigation of this kind is still unprecedented and can
significantly assist the continent in leapfrogging the need for costly electrification whilst ensuring the growth
in railway capacity in the region. The project focused on three primary areas: (i) modelling tools for the
identification of specific capabilities in tractive requirements; (ii) architectural models for cost-effective
traction solutions, and (iii) capacity building for research uptake on the operational and technical aspects of
railway traction.
To achieve that, five main objectives were pursued:
• Analyse current and future traffic volumes in key railway corridors to draw representative case studies;
• Model and simulate representative lines to identify the main capability requirements for alternative
traction systems;
• Develop a model architecture for zero-emission traction systems for LICs using volumetric analyses of a
case study;
• Devise retrofitting concept of operations (CONOPs) to maximise the potential benefits of using existing
fleets;
• Produce dissemination and research uptake in LICs on the technologies and solutions developed.

3. Methodology
The methodology was devised over five main technical work packages aimed at transforming the initial
literature review into representative case studies. Those were analysed using modelling and simulation tools
to derive key capabilities and volumetric requirements. Subsequently, a case study was used to produce a
more detailed perspective on the feasibility of retrofitting existing stock. These all converged into the
production of the model as well as the delivery of dedicated training and engagement for dissemination and
research uptake.

Figure 1. Overall project methodology

6
FINAL REPORT

4. Scope
The project focused on low-income countries (LICs) in Sub-Saharan Africa. The general definition of Sub-
Saharan Africa is drawn from the United Nations Statistical Division and can be defined as the part of the
African continent south of the Sahara desert consisting of the overwhelming majority of Africa’s landmass [7]
[8]. We decided to exceptionally include Sudan in the research because of the similarities between the
country’s railway infrastructure and the other Sub-Saharan African countries. Small island countries were not
considered due to their scale.
The definition of low-income countries in this project follows that of the World Bank, of having a Gross
National Income (GNI) of US$1,035 per capita or less [9] in 2020. Nonetheless, it was found that the economic
criterion alone would exclude countries that share similar issues with railway infrastructure and also qualify
for international lending. The project team decided to add a second layer based on Human Development
Indices (HDI) as defined by the United Nations Development Programme [10]. In this evaluation, countries
scoring 0.55 or less are classed as low-development countries.
It was found that some countries in Sub-Saharan Africa are classed as low-income but not as low-
development, and some countries are classed as low-development but not as low-income. Some countries are
found to be both in the low-income and low-development groups. These countries share some similarities in
their state of infrastructure and operational performance. Some excluded countries were added to
commentary and analysis as they may have a similar context or share railway lines with the countries within
the scope of the project. Table 1 lists the countries within the scope of the project, as well as their GNI per
capita and Human Development Index in 2021. Different colours have been used as identifiers:
Table 1: List of countries within the scope of the project [9, 10]

Country GNI per capita (in USD) Human Development Index

Benin 1250 0.545
Burkina Faso 780 0.452
Cote d'Ivoire 2290 0.538
Djibouti 3310 0.524
DR Congo 530 0.480
Eritrea 600 0.459
Ethiopia 850 0.485
Guinea 930 0.477
Liberia 580 0.480
Madagascar 520 0.528
Malawi 380 0.483
Mozambique 490 0.456
Nigeria 2030 0.539
Sierra Leone 540 0.452
South Sudan 1090 0.433
Sudan 590 0.510
Tanzania 1080 0.529
Togo 690 0.515
Uganda 780 0.544

It is important to emphasise that the combined criteria may have left out countries that were also relevant to
the study. Firstly, because they may not currently operate railway services, even if there is any railway
infrastructure within the country. Secondly, because they may have development indicators which are closer
to the scope of this project than the countries in the middle-income tier. Finally, because some countries may
share border-crossing lines with countries that are within the scope of the project. As observed, it is difficult
to set hard boundaries in scope because economic and/or development indicators do not necessarily
correlate with the maturity of railway infrastructure or levels of operational performance.
7
FINAL REPORT

SECTION 2: TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS

1. Update on the State of Knowledge (SoK)
In 2018, the University of Birmingham’s Centre for Railway Research and Education (BCRRE) conducted a
review of the state of knowledge on railway infrastructure in low-income countries (LICs) in Sub-Saharan
Africa. The project was part of Phase 1 of the High Volume Transport (HVT) Programme and consisted of a
thorough literature review supported by a stakeholder workshop in Nairobi, Kenya, to assess the levels of
infrastructure and operational performance in the region.
Regarding the maturity of the railway infrastructure, the overall state of Sub-Saharan African countries
continues to be mostly in poor shape. With the exception of a few newly built lines, the network in the region
has remained unchanged since the period of European influence, with assets dating back to almost 100 years
ago. As a result, most lines are extraction lines connecting commodity hubs to ports. Moreover, also as a
result of the fragmented and competitive European exploitation of the region, there is very little connectivity
and interoperability.
Figure 2: Different track gauges in use in Sub-Saharan Africa (adapted from Creative Commons) [11]

With the emergence and subsequent dominance of road transport in the second half of the twentieth
century, the railways in Sub-Saharan African low-income countries entered a downward spiral of shrinking
revenues, insufficient maintenance, and inefficient operations that led to the current state. It was found that
in many countries, major sections of tracks were not in operation and required rehabilitation before any
operation could recommence, such as Ghana, Uganda, and Benin.
Since the 1990s, the region has experimented with privatisations and concessions as an attempt to revitalise
the railway sector with varying levels of success. Concessions such as SITARAIL (Burkina Faso/Cote d’Ivoire),
CAMRAIL (Cameroon), Nacala-CDN (Mozambique), and MADARAIL (Madagascar) remain active and even
productive in some cases. Other agreements were not as successful such as the Rift Valley Railway concession
(Kenya/Uganda), where the operator did not achieve the expected performance set in the contract. Similarly,
8
FINAL REPORT

TransRail operating between Senegal and Mali, has recently stopped operations due to the fluctuation in the
price of commodities.
Regardless of the ownership structure, the state of infrastructure in Sub-Saharan LICs was found to be
insufficient when compared to the global averages, with a much more drastic contrast when compared to
world leaders in railway transport [12, 13, 14]. For instance, The network density for all Sub-Saharan LICs,
measured in route-km per km2 of land area, is only one-tenth of that of the United States, which has a similar
land area. The total network size of the countries of this study combined is smaller than that of the top ten
countries in the world in terms of network size and traffic.
Data availability and consistency remain one of the main challenges for railway research in the region.
Information regarding railway performance and assets was found to be outdated or missing. This was
emphasised in the three main sources for the state of knowledge in the region [12, 15, 13]. Until 2009, the
World Bank maintained a comprehensive database dedicated to railway infrastructure in Africa, which was
used to fill knowledge gaps during phase one [16]. Since then, improvements in data reporting have been
found to vary greatly among countries, being also influenced by changes in ownership.
An updated commentary was made for data availability:
• Lines operated by concessionaires were mostly found to lack transparency reporting. Information about
Benin (BENIRAIL) and SITARAIL (Burkina Faso/Cote d’Ivoire) was only briefly available in the company’s
annual report from 2018 [17]. The document mentions only the annual tonnage moved, in that tonne-km
had to be inferred by multiplying it by the length of the line.
• The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) was the only country where up-to-date data was published by the
International Union of Railways (UIC) [3]. Being one of the few countries in the region to hold a
membership of the union, the national operator (SNCC) maintains an updated record annually up to 2019
[18].
• Up-to-date information regarding the Ethio-Djibouti Railway Corporation was sent via e-mail in January
2021, with 2020 data, by the operator’s director following the project stakeholder engagement workshop.
• Obtaining information about Guinea's railway network was particularly challenging due to its fragmented
and independent private mining lines. Despite being the region's highest volume of traffic, the latest
available information dates back to 2005, according to the World Bank database.
• Similarly, there are few concrete sources of primary and secondary statistics for the Liberian railway sector.
Building from the concessionaire’s latest annual report [19], Arcelor Mittal operates its renewed line
between Buchanan and Tokadeh, connecting its mining operation and its port.
• MADARAIL (Madagascar) has published partial reports on their respective websites, which are slightly
outdated (2017) [20]. All statistics are included and allow the completion of their respective indicators.
• Malawi publishes aggregated statistics on rail traffic through its Statistical Yearbook [21]
• Three countries were found to lack any updated information: Togo and South Sudan.
• Nigeria, despite being one of the few countries where renovation work and the construction of new lines
have taken place, did not publish complete data sets within international standards (UIC) since 2005. In its
Annual Abstract of Statistics [22], the country publishes the total number of passengers and the total
number of tonnes carried but not passenger-km, not tonne-km. Similarly, information on railway transport
stock is not published. A number of contacts in the Federal Ministry of Transportation have been contacted
to provide updated information, but none has been received to date.
• It was found that Sudan reported their national statistics regularly and comprehensively until 2014 within
the UIC database [18]. No later data was found. Staff from the Sudan Railway Corporation were contacted
to provide up-to-date information, but none has been received to date.

9
FINAL REPORT

• Tanzania and Mozambique publish annual reports that were up-to-date (2019 and 2021, respectively),
comprehensive, and clear in terms of performance (passenger-km and tonne-km) [23, 24].
• Traffic information from the Uganda Railways Corporation is up to date and found in the Statistical Abstract
of the Uganda Bureau of Statistics [25]. Data includes net tonnes, tonne-km, and the number of passengers.
There is no information regarding passenger-km.
Table 2: Data currency for countries (and international routes) within the study scope

Country/ International Route Data Currency Source(s)

Benin 2005 UIC database
2018 Bollore Logistics report [17]
SITARAIL 2018 Bollore Logistics report [17]
DR Congo 2019 UIC database [18]
Ethio-Djibouti Railway 2021 Ethiopian Railway Corporation
Guinea 2005 World Bank database [26]
Liberia 2018 Arcelor Mittal [19]
Madagascar 2014 MADARAIL website [20]
Malawi 2007 UIC database [18]
Mozambique 2019 Annual statistical report [24]
Nigeria 2005 World Bank database [16]
Sudan 2014 UIC database [18]
Tanzania 2019 National statistics [23]

Togo 2005 World Bank database [16]

Uganda 2021 Uganda Bureau of Statistics [25]

2. Scenario analysis
Trend analyses of railway traffic in low-income countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have indicated little
predictability and highlighted the shortcomings of potential forecasts in the region. The fragmented trade and
diverse uses and maintenance levels of lines across the region mean that volumes are highly volatile. The
story in Uganda is a relevant example where the network was concessioned in an attempt to increase
productivity which was not realised. Other countries, such as Guinea and Liberia, resorted to authorisation
pathways where private companies have become responsible for the lines used, which led to high
productivity and traffic densities [1]. Of the countries studied in this project, Tanzania represents the third
group where large investments are being made in the construction of new Standard Gauge Lines to increase
traffic volumes and make rail transport more attractive through economies of scale.
In place of forecasts, therefore, the study applied scenario analysis methods to assess four different futures
and their impacts on traffic volumes. Due to a lack of a comprehensive set of forecasts for traffic growth,
scenarios build on projections made for the East African region by the World Bank [27]. In 2013, the report
projected that traffic would grow 800% from 1.6 million tonnes to 14.6 million tonnes annually. Such forecasts
were potentially taking into account the contemporary plans for an East African Standard Gauge Network,
which has only been partially completed.
Moreover, there have been issues and uncertainties surrounding the matter. While it was believed that a
Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) line could carry 25 million tonnes annually against 5.5 million tonnes of a
renovated legacy line, growth was not fully realised in the Kenyan case where the Port Authority needed to
impose mandates on importers to fully utilise the line [28].
10
FINAL REPORT

However, the use of scenarios is meant to accommodate a range of possible futures, with the intent to
capture the space between the probable and the desirable. There are many variables influencing traffic
volumes, such as the quality of infrastructure; sections in use/disuse; speed limits; presence/absence of
subsidies; ownership models; etc. This research used a more flexible approach based on the work of Gallopin
et al. [29].
Four distinct scenarios were developed based on a two-dimensional matrix that encompasses two dimensions
of Governance (the presence of strong strategic directions from the national and regional governments) and
Technical Development (the implementation of current and future technologies on the systems). For a more
detailed description of each scenario, please refer to the Traffic Volume Report [30] from this project.
Figure 3: Scenarios used for analysis

Scenarios were then evaluated against classes and variants, and their behaviour was analysed over a set of
themes. In alignment with the HVT programme, the themes expand beyond operational indicators to include
environmental, economic, and social aspects consideration. The themes in question are below, and the
relevant behaviour of each scenario against the themes is shown in Figure 3Error! Reference source not f
ound..
• Traffic volumes, as a product of operational efficiency
• Technology adoption as a measure of innovation
• Environmental impacts of railway transport
• Financial viability reflecting the profitability of railway lines
• Governance reflecting the role of government in maintaining the railway sector
• Social impacts encompassing the wider influence on mobility, equity, and access to opportunities

2.1 African Vision

This scenario explores the possibility of the completion, or at least part-completion, of the goals stated in the
Agenda 2063 initiative of the African Union [31]. This includes a network of ten High-Speed Rail Corridors, as
pictured in Figure 4 [32]. Very close to a desirable scenario; it encompasses significant changes in integration,
technological advancement, modal shift, and cohesive governance. Based on a study by CPCS [32], these links
can carry at least 50 million tonnes, whilst some may achieve much greater volumes of up to 15 billion tonnes

11
FINAL REPORT

thanks to improved capacity and speed. Construction of new tracks occurs simultaneously with the renewal of
existing lines for regional traffic and adds up to 20,000 km of tracks to the continent. This increases the
network density and improves overall access by the population and businesses.
Figure 4: Proposed High-Speed Rail Network of the AU Agenda 2063 [32]

It logically follows that in such a vision, traffic volumes will increase considerably, perhaps achieving the 800%
growth foreseen by the World Bank. Nonetheless, the growth will not be linear but an exponential curve. To
achieve such an outcome, a slower start is to be made with works on interoperability, the construction of new
infrastructure and the procurement of rolling stock. Once the systems are in place, the curve shoots upwards.
To achieve that, the constant adoption of technological advancements must take place so that capabilities
and performance levels are paved to enable the following steps in traffic volumes. This goes hand in hand
with financial viability, where a positive feedback loop increases efficiency, which in turn lowers the price of
haulage. Novel traction systems can find ways to increase capacity without the initial costs of electrification
until volumes make the latter a justifiable investment.
The positive impacts on the environment, however, can be observed from the beginning of the development
trajectory and takes an accelerated pace. These are a result of cleaner technologies that reduce emissions at
the point of use, as well as modal shifts resulting from lower haulage prices. Savings in emissions, however,
follow the law of diminishing returns, and once technological capabilities reach a certain point, improvements
begin to result in ever smaller marginal reductions.
All the changes in the African Vision scenario are built on the understanding of better and more cohesive
governance. This is in stark contrast to the situation so far, where initiatives for railway development have
been fragmented and dispersed. The scenario envisages a more active presence of policy maker and
regulators as enabling forces to facilitate the adoption of new technologies and facilitate funding of railways
to promote a modal shift.

12
FINAL REPORT

Social impacts, if these lines are planned cohesively as per the Agenda 2063 plan, will take place throughout
the timeline. Firstly with the revitalisation of local routes, then with the possibility of easier travel through
longer routes, and also benefitting in access to goods from more cost-effective supply chains. On a smaller but
not irrelevant scale, the growth of the railway industry in the region also has a positive impact on jobs,
entrepreneurship, and opportunity.

2.2 Renewed links

The scenario of Renewed Links foresees a much more modest growth in the railway network, especially across
low-income countries. In this scenario, high-speed rail links are achieved in higher-income countries but
cannot find economic justification in low-income countries within the timeframe. Instead, it views a greater
focus on the renewal and some upgrading of the existing network to reinstate traffic across the region. The
scenario presents a mix of probable and possible futures based on the latest happenings in countries such as
Nigeria, Kenya, and Uganda. Nigeria and Kenya, both countries that built new Standard Gauge Rail lines using
international loans, have found considerable challenges in matching the high construction costs with
sufficient traffic. Kenyan and Ugandan railways have also decided to invest in the revitalisation of existing
metre gauge lines as a more cost-effective way to improve traffic in the region.
Traffic volumes in the Renewed Links scenario take an initial hit as works must be performed on the only track
available. However, once the work is done, sections of the network that are currently unused or with severe
speed restrictions will return to full capacity and permit greater overall volumes. According to the World Bank
study [27], track renewal could achieve up to 5.5 million tonnes hauled (considering 40 train services per
week and 40 wagons per train) or 60 million per line fully upgraded to allow for 25 tonnes per axle.
The physical limitations of renovated/upgraded tracks, in contrast to new SGR lines with higher specifications,
may result in a slower upwards curve in traffic volumes. Nonetheless, considering a constant increase in
governance and, consequently, technological adoption, it is expected that achievable (and achieved) traffic
volumes are to increase at an accelerating pace and potentially exceed the initial calculations. The study
highlights that metre gauge lines in Brazil can achieve 45 tonnes per axle, which could see traffic volumes
reach 100 million tonnes on busy links.
This scenario understands the crucial role of governance in providing a fruitful platform for innovation so that
capabilities can be increased further than just returning the legacy network to its original state. Strong
support in capacity building accompanies funding, especially when the latter comes from international loans.
Also, governance plays an important role in connectivity and interoperability, improving the border crossing
on currently dispersed and fragmented standards.
Such a combination adds much-needed capacity to the networks and reinstates sufficient financial viability so
that haulage costs are competitive against the rail. Regulation may still be necessary at points to internalise
external costs and promote fair competition that benefits stakeholders equally. The increased role of rail in
freight traffic, currently relegated to around 10% of the volumes moved in LICs in Sub-Saharan Africa, is
expected to have a direct impact on the overall emissions from transport. With that, environmental benefits
are expected to follow an S-shaped trajectory. Slower in the beginning, reflecting the time to reinstate
infrastructure, but rapidly accelerating once the lines are at full capacity. At a certain point, diminishing
returns result in marginal gains over increasing efforts until the sector achieves carbon neutrality.
Similarly, social benefits increase from added accessibility of the reinstatement of abandoned routes, but at a
smaller scale to the African Vision scenario where rail offers competitive alternatives to medium and long-
distance links. Opportunities arise in the sector, yet given the scale of the industry, the impacts are
constrained.

2.3 Private railways

This analysis examines the likelihood of railways in low-income countries (LICs) in sub-Saharan Africa following
the footsteps of Guinea, Liberia, and parts of Mozambique, where private companies take full or partial
13
FINAL REPORT

control of railway lines. The study presents a potential version of the "business as usual" scenario, where the
railways remain underdeveloped and are not renovated to stimulate sufficient traffic for financial
sustainability. It highlights that some countries in the region may be moving towards this direction due to
financial and governance challenges that hinder the funding of railway operations and maintenance, resulting
in the gradual deterioration of rail infrastructure and making it increasingly challenging to sustain traffic.
Private companies taking over may be the only solution when railways in LICs in Sub-Saharan Africa reach a
point where they become financially unsustainable due to inadequate funding for operations and
maintenance. However, it's important to note that not all concessions fall under this scenario as it depends on
contractual terms. In cases where regulation is absent, concessions may follow a similar trajectory. The lack of
governance and regulatory oversight may result in a downward curve, where the role of regulators and policy
makers in the sector is gradually reduced.
In such cases, traffic volumes tend to follow a predictable trajectory. Initially, traffic volumes stagnate, and
the need for private investment becomes apparent. Private companies, driven by their incentives to reduce
costs and increase productivity, select only the most profitable lines to operate. This approach is supported by
examples from around the world, where essential upgrades are carried out on promising lines, resulting in
traffic densities comparable to those found in high-income countries. Typically, such transformations occur in
mining connections, where economies of scale generate healthy profit margins. These upgrades may involve
line improvements or even the construction of Standard Gauge lines capable of carrying maximum axle loads
and hauling as many tonnes as possible.
However, relying on a single product for traffic may create limitations on traffic volume due to demand forces
rather than technical capability. This situation is observed in Guinea and Liberia, where the haulage of a single
product reaches values of over 7 million tonnes annually. On the other hand, some corridors have the
potential to achieve much greater volumes by linking entire regions (such as the East African Community).
Additionally, traffic volumes are also limited by the law of diminishing returns. At a certain point, the amount
of engineering effort required to increase volumes becomes financially uninteresting.
That is why the Private Railways scenario understands that financial viability follows a similar curve to traffic
volumes, as both are closely linked in this case. Financial viability is limited by demand, and in the case of
extractive activities, it may also be limited by supply. Technology adoption is also modest in this scenario
because market forces drive it. There is a push for technologies that increases productivity, but cost-benefit
analyses strictly scrutinise all innovation. Radical innovations like traction systems are less likely to be adopted
if they require large fleets and/or infrastructure investments.
Consequently, the environmental impacts remain largely unchanged since they are unlikely to be prioritised.
In fact, since some less profitable corridors may be abandoned, the modal shift can revert to even greater
dominance of road transport and lead to further environmental degradation. The same can be said for social
benefits where there are few changes, lest some negative impacts. The productivity of privately run lines may
not revert to social benefits if all are focused on the exports of commodities.

2.4 Forgotten tracks

This scenario is a variation of the Private Railways and, to some extent, a projection of current trends in some
LICs. Forgotten tracks explore the possibility that, apart from a few lines, most lines fail to produce sufficient
financial viability to maintain operations. The lack of appropriate maintenance (due to financial shortcomings
and skills gaps) initiates a vicious circle where capacity is reduced and, therefore, haulage costs increase. As a
result, they fail to attract private investment and cannot justify the high level of subsidies or direct funding
from public money. One by one, lines are slowly abandoned while goods are transported on roads where
lower operational costs ensure some level of movement.
Such a trajectory comprises an apathy towards the adoption of new technologies since continuous losses
prevent stakeholders from investment beyond the bare essentials. Following the slow degradation of assets,

14
FINAL REPORT

financial viability slowly declines from maintenance to speed restrictions, to section closures, to line
abandonment.
With it, the social benefits linked to railway transport erode to give way to unregulated modes where societal
interests are an afterthought. With that, affordability and accessibility are reduced at the expense of unsolved
cartels and high fares in the road and air transport.
The trajectory of governance is expected to take an up-and-down curve until oblivion. Initially, the
government and public funds are required to take over in order to maintain services. This is not dissimilar to
the recent examples in Uganda, where the concession could not produce sufficient volumes, so assets were
returned to the government body, and Kenya, where the face of the high interests on the loaned Standard
Gauge line has led the government cancel the renewal of the concession and operate the line itself.
Nonetheless, once the lines start to degrade to a certain level, funding for governance starts to be applied
elsewhere, and with that, the network rapidly enters a downward spiral of shrinkage.
Finally, the impacts on the environment are felt as the mode shifts towards more polluting options, mainly on
the road. This scenario does not take into account potential changes in the road sector and adopts a business-
as-usual perspective on it. Without appropriate policies, the unregulated road sector maintains reluctance to
implement cleaner technologies, and 10% of freight moved by rail ends up generating up to three times more
emissions per tonne-km.
Figure 5: Future scenarios and their trajectories in selected themes

3. Selection of case studies

Given the difficulty in elaborating a systematic process to select case studies in the region for further
research, the project team adopted an alternative qualitative approach based on stakeholder inputs and line
characteristics. The approach was based on representative case studies that would stand as example lines
that can be found across the region so that quantitative analyses based on modelling and simulations were to
be conducted.
Following a key stakeholder workshop (page 44), in January 2021, experts were asked to submit their
suggestions for case studies that are representative of the services operated in the region. From the
comments received during the workshop and on a survey afterwards, four case studies were selected and are

15
FINAL REPORT

listed in Table 3. The selection of case studies was through on the agreement level on their
representativeness, indicated by the number of mentions in surveys or during the workshop.
Table 3. List of selected case studies

Route considered Country Route type Length Gauge

Kampala – Namanve Uganda Commuter 14km 1,000mm

Buchanan – Tokadeh Liberia Heavy haul freight 243km 1,435mm

Long distance
Dar es Salaam – Kigoma Tanzania 1,254km 1,000mm
passenger

Standard Gauge
Railway (designed for
mixed traffic but
Abuja – Kaduna Nigeria 186km 1,435mm
currently only
operating passenger
services)

16
FINAL REPORT

SECTION 3: CAPABILITY ANALYSES

1. Single train simulator graphical user interface tool
Following the selection of case studies performed in the simulation report [33] of this project, it was possible
to analyse the traction capabilities required for each route in the form of traction power and energy
consumption. This essential process enabled us to assess the feasibility and suitability of alternative traction
systems. We used the University of Birmingham’s Single Train Simulator (STS), a piece of code written in
Matlab (a mathematics ‘engine’). This was then used to calculate the traction energy required for a return
journey, adding an estimated load to cover on-train services such as Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning
(HVAC) and lighting.
The Single Train Simulator (STS) is a software simulation tool developed by researchers at the Birmingham
Centre for Railway Research and Education (BCRRE) for evaluating the energy consumption of railway traction.
It is based on the first principle of longitudinal dynamics and the energy conservation principle. The longitudinal
dynamics are expressed in the form of mathematical formulae that, when combined, form a simulation model.
The model is then used to predict the motion of a train under a set of conditions, namely gradient, train mass,
friction, and traction force applied [33]. For a more detailed description of STS, please refer to the Simulation
Report [33] from this project.
STS first computes the traction force 𝐹𝑇 required to fulfil a given acceleration profile 𝛼 using the Davis equation
formula:
m(1+λ)α=F(T-(a+bv+cv^2+mgθ) )

Where 𝑚 is train mass, 𝑎 + 𝑏𝑣 + 𝑐𝑣 2 is the summation of frictional forces, and 𝑚𝑔𝜃 is gravitational pull. The
acceleration profile 𝛼 is derived from a given velocity profile 𝑣.
After obtaining the traction force required to fulfil a trip, STS then computes the energy required by the
respective traction system. STS uses powertrain efficiency curves that are custom to the selected traction
technology in order to provide more accurate energy estimates. The energy required at each step is computed
using the formula:
𝑭𝑻 𝜟
𝑬=
𝜼

𝛥 is the distance for which a specific 𝐹𝑇 is applied, and 𝜂 is the powertrain’s efficiency. Total energy
consumption is then computed by adding the consumption of all steps. The energy calculation only accounts
for traction requirements and does not account for hotel loads.
The STS is highly flexible by allowing the user to specify the railway route and the parameters of the train
simulated and modular enough to accommodate various traction systems, both conventional and hybrid. The
state-of-charge 𝜁 of the energy storage device of hybrid powertrains is modelled using the formula:

𝒅𝜻 −𝒊
=
𝒅𝒕 𝟑𝟔𝟎𝟎. 𝑸

𝑖 is battery current, and 𝑄 is battery capacity. Battery current is computed using battery voltage and traction
power.

17
FINAL REPORT

As part of the dissemination outputs of the project, we developed a Graphical User Interface (GUI) where
stakeholders can conduct their own capability assessments for other lines beyond our case studies. The GUI
was made publicly available, and the link was also shared directly with contacts in the project database.
Figure 6 shows the interface of the tool.
Figure 6: Screenshot of STS GUI

The left part of the screen is dedicated to simulation settings and parameters, whereas the right part is
reserved for plotting and displaying numerical results. This allows users to adjust routes and parameters
without requiring reprogramming and presents key results clearly and understandably. However, it is
important to note that the STS only provides values related to the kinetic energy required to move the train,
which includes factors such as gravitational potential energy and drag. Other energy-consuming factors, such
as lighting, heating, and cooling of passenger cars, are not included in the STS calculations. However, the
power supply to these factors is isolated via the parameter Auxiliary Power to differentiate between traction
power and auxiliary power.
Section 1 of the GUI concerns vehicle characteristics. There are several default options, or one can customise
their own train using the train properties in this section, including:
• Tare mass (tonnes/trainset). This is the mass of the train (in tonnes) without crush load or passengers
weight
• Maximum speed (km/h). The maximum speed at the train is permitted to travel
• Rotational inertia. This figure describes the fact that when a train moves, it is not just a particle;
within the bearings etc., components have to be turned to achieve movement. To correct for this, a
factor is applied, usually around 0.08 [34]
• Max. motor power (kW). The maximum power (in kilowatts) that can be used to propel the train
• Dwell time (s). This is the time (in seconds) allowed at each station by the simulator
• Passenger/freight load (tonnes). The mass (in tonnes) of freight or passengers carried
• Max. tractive effort (kN). The maximum force that the train can develop to move forward
• Max. accelerating rate (m/s^2). The maximum acceleration which the train is permitted to use
• Max. braking rate (m/s^2). The maximum deceleration which the train is permitted to use.

18
FINAL REPORT

Section 2 of the GUI concerns the traction system, the system which takes a fuel or electricity supply and
turns it into power for the wheels in order to drive the train.
There are several types of traction systems to choose from, including:
• Line side electrification. This is a system of supplying electricity to a train using the lineside
infrastructure. When selected, the user may select a voltage for the substations (AC for overhead
lines and DC for line side electrification) and the resistance of both the traction current distribution
and the return current distribution (that is, the resistance of the circuit between the substation and
the train, and back to the substation respectively)
• Diesel. This simulates a diesel engine. When selected, the user may select the maximum power of
said diesel engine
• Hydrogen hybrid. This simulates a system made up of a hydrogen fuel cell and a battery. When
selected, the user may input the power of the fuel cell stack (in kW), the capacity of the battery, and
its C rate (more on this in Section 4)
• Diesel hybrid. This is very similar to the hydrogen hybrid, but with a diesel engine in place of the fuel
cell stack
• Hydrogen only. This simulates a system made up of a hydrogen fuel cell only. When selected, the user
may input the power of the fuel cell stack
• Battery only. This simulates a train powered exclusively by a battery. One may input the capacity and
C rate of the battery
It should be noted that, while in theory, any of these can be simulated, some are not recommended in certain
cases. For example, battery-powered trains are not appropriate for larger energy requirements due to the
energy storage limitations of current battery technology. This was discussed in further detail in the Capability
Analysis Report [35].
Section 3 concerns the route data. There are several test routes to choose from and a customised route
option; this is entered externally in a spreadsheet provided with the STS. More information is found in the
manual in Appendix B.
The outputs consist of three diagrams:
• A running diagram with velocity on the y-axis and time on the x-axis
• A power diagram showing the power used by both the traction system and the brakes during the run
• An energy diagram showing the cumulative energy use over the simulation run
There are also several number outputs. For all cases, the journey time is listed, as is the kinetic energy
required. The other outputs concern energy and fuel consumption, whether that be in terms of kilowatt hours
(kWh) for batteries, diesel (litres) or hydrogen (kg) consumption.
The user interface was hosted on the project website and the link sent via newsletter to stakeholders in the
project’s mailing list in order to reach out potential users within a secure framework for file sharing.

2. Route analysis
We used the Single Train Simulation (STS) tool to estimate the capability requirements of the four
representative case studies. Due to the lack of digitalised and publicly available information, the topography
of the routes was derived from Google Earth. The elevation is a critical component of the research as steeper
inclines require more tractive power and therefore consume more fuel, under the assumption that speed is to
be maintained. The line in Tanzania was divided into sections due to its length, which did not affect the
accuracy of the simulation.
Each line was assumed to have its relevant configuration in the number of locomotives and carriages or
wagons. In addition, the weight of the rolling stock was also considered in a route-by-route manner, with
more powerful locomotives being heavier and wagons having distinct loads. The detailed report on the
19
FINAL REPORT

simulation, including figures on gradient profiles and results from the STS tool, can be found in our Capability
Analysis Report [35].
The line between Kampala and Namanve, given its uniquely short length, lower speeds, and commuting
characteristics, had obvious potential for battery systems. That is due to the lower power requirements and
the shorter range required for the duty cycle. Therefore, it was simulated already using the battery-powered
systems known as Ultra Light Rail (ULR). These are battery-powered multiple units that do not require a
locomotive or additional large-scale infrastructure intervention [36]. Consequently, it is seen as a naturally
cost-effective solution close to implementation.
The train configuration was applied to the number of services run in each case study. Those were inferred
from timetables found on operators’ reports and/or websites [37, 38]. There is a lack of available and
accurate data for those. Figure 7 illustrate the rolling stock found to be in use in those countries, and

Table 4 describes the configuration used for each case study.

Figure 7: Photos of representative rolling stock used for simulations - (a) Uganda; (b) Liberia; (c) Tanzania; (d) Nigeria

(a) [39] (b) [40]

(c) [41] (d) [42]

Table 4. Configuration used for each case study

Uganda Liberia Tanzania Nigeria

Configuration
Kampala-Namanve Buchanan-Tokadeh Dar - Kigoma Abuja – Kaduna

Number of locomotives 0 3 1 1
Number of wagons 5 75 10 6
Total mass (loaded) 160 tonnes 9580 tonnes 500 tonnes 340 tonnes

20
FINAL REPORT

Traction power 840kW 9780 kW 1800 kW 1500kW

Auxiliary power 50kW 120 kW 200 kW 120kW

Using the configurations above in the STS tool gave us important outputs regarding each case study's fuel
and/or energy requirement, measured against distinct types of traction systems. Both diesel and diesel hybrid
systems were examined to account for the latest developments on existing combustion engines. Batteries
were only considered for case studies where they could provide enough capabilities and therefore were
limited to mostly the commuter case study in Uganda.
Table 5 summarises the findings from the capability analysis in terms of fuel requirements and the associated
CO2 emissions for each case study. The commuter line between Kampala and Namanve in Uganda was
examined with four different traction systems as Diesel only, Diesel hybrid, Hydrogen hybrid and Battery only
are presented in Table 5, whereas the others were only assessed with diesel, diesel hybrid and hydrogen
hybrid systems.
The term hybrid in both instances (diesel and hydrogen) means a combination with batteries to reduce fuel
consumption. In railways, batteries can play an important part in storing energy also from regenerative
braking.
In many instances, diesel hybrid systems can provide marginal reductions in fuel consumption and emissions
but still produce considerably more CO2 than alternative traction. Batteries and hydrogen systems are seen as
having zero emissions at the point of use. However, our calculations [35] also considered that the production
of hydrogen could be associated with emissions; therefore, our outputs highlighted the range of emissions
produced.
In all but one case, alternative traction systems have shown the potential to reduce CO2 emissions associated
with railway services, even considering the externalities of hydrogen production from non-renewable sources.
The exception found is the heavy haul line in Liberia, which could result in more environmental impacts due to
the very high power requirements and steep gradients.
Table 5. Summary of fuel requirements and respective emissions for each route studied

Energy and emissions Capability analysis

Duty cycle
Route Country
considered
Traction system Amount required CO2 emissions

Diesel only 610 litres 1,633 kg

Kampala –
Namanve Daily use Diesel hybrid 535 litres 1,431 kg
(Short distance, Uganda (5 return
lightweight trips) Hydrogen hybrid 14 kg 0 to 192 kg
commuter train)
Battery only 366 kWh 0 kg

Dar es Salaam – Diesel only 12,394 litres 33,214 kg

Kigoma
(Long distance, Tanzania Return trip Diesel hybrid 12,719 litres 34,084 kg
locomotive hauled
passenger) Hydrogen hybrid 1,498 kg 0 to 20,508 kg

Buchanan – Diesel only 2,814 litres 7,510 kg

Tokadeh
(Medium distance, Liberia Return trip Diesel hybrid 2,470 litres 5,150 kg0
heavy locomotive
hauled freight) Hydrogen hybrid 1,941 kg 0 to 19,016 kg

21
FINAL REPORT

Abuja – Kaduna Diesel only 2,728 litres 7,311 kg

(Medium distance,
locomotive hauled Nigeria Daily use Diesel hybrid 2,717 litres 7,282 kg
passenger)
Hydrogen hybrid 345 kg 0 to 4,715 kg

The key overarching findings were as follows:

• The shorter commuting route could be operated using a number of different types of traction,
including hybrid drives, hydrogen and operated using ULRs rather than conventional rolling stock;
• However, the longer passenger and freight routes require a considerable quantity of energy to be
stored on-board, which restricts the number of alternative traction options that would be
suitable;
• The heavy haul freight route (in Liberia) requires a high-level of installed power which further
restricts the suitable range of traction types.
• Battery and hydrogen powertrains provide a clear emissions reduction in comparison to diesel for
commuter and long-distance routes
This step of the project was critical as it helped identify a case study that was not feasible to pursue due to the
current performance of alternative traction systems. In contrast, electrification may be a more justifiable
approach to decarbonising a heavy haul line by providing the required power and capacity between the mine
and port, considering the existing high traffic volumes. This would increase the certainty of return on
investments.
For the other routes, findings show that alternative traction systems can stand competitively, providing
enough capability to operate services as they are or as they may be in the future. In doing so, adopting
alternative traction systems could lead to considerable reductions in CO2 emissions: 600 tonnes/year in
Uganda, 1,000 tonnes/year in Nigeria, and over 10,000 tonnes/year in Tanzania. The values for hydrogen
hybrid are given as a range because they depend on the source of electricity used to produce the fuel. The
production of hydrogen is energy-intensive, so if the electricity comes from fossil fuel sources, the emissions
associated with them will be high. Should the production of hydrogen come from zero-carbon sources, then
all hydrogen hybrid systems are free of emissions.

22
FINAL REPORT

SECTION 4: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

1. Revision of case studies
Following the results from the capability analyses, it was established that the heavy haul case study in Liberia
would not be yet suitable for alternative traction systems at the current state of technological performance.
The analysis indicates that the total round-trip hydrogen requirement for the entire trip would be onerous,
which makes it less suitable for the alternative traction system. Even if a hydrogen-hybrid option were
pursued, refuelling would be performed at each end of the line rather than just fuelling the train once for the
entire trip, which would still be far in excess of any existing hydrogen-powered train. Additionally, there is no
overall benefit to hybridisation in terms of CO2 emissions, and the diesel hybrid option produces worse fuel
consumption than the diesel-only option due to the constant speed nature of the route. The report also
suggests that the SMR hydrogen emissions figure is exceedingly high due to the fuel cells operating in an
inefficient regime for a protracted period, combined with the inherently high carbon emissions of SMR
hydrogen production. Table 6 then shows the three case studies that were taken forward to the next stage,
namely the Architectural Design process.
Table 6. Revised list of case studies

Route considered Country Route type Length Gauge

Kampala – Namanve Uganda Commuter 12km 1,000mm

Long distance
Dar es Salaam – Kigoma Tanzania 1,254km 1,000mm
passenger

Standard Gauge
Railway (designed for
mixed traffic but
Abuja – Kaduna Nigeria 186km 1,435mm
currently only
operating passenger
services)

2. Details of the rolling stock configuration

2.1 Kampala – Namanve line
Kampala to Namanve is a 12 km route located in the suburbs of the Ugandan capital Kampala. The complete
track is designed with a 1000 mm gauge (also known as a meter gauge). The route consists of five stations,
including the terminus at the Namanve [43]. The track comes with a mild elevation of a few meters on a few
sections. The track serves approximately 2,000 passengers daily over 2 round trips per day. Due to a lack of
data, the line speed of this route was assumed to be 40 kph.
The rolling stock operating on the above-mentioned route is a locomotive-hauled train with an average of 5
coaches, which includes only seated coaches [44]. Data was very sparse for that specific fleet. Thus, we
decided to approach the capability using a current solution, namely an ultra-lightweight rail vehicle (ULR). The
ULR, although unavailable in LICs, was chosen to expand the research on novel traction systems to those
where electric traction may be sufficient.
In the simulation report, the ULR was simulated in a configuration with five carriages to match that operating
in Uganda. Alternative operations that could require shorter trains were not calculated as they are outside the
scope of the project. The hydrogen hybrid ULR would require considerable hydrogen storage space,

23
FINAL REPORT

specifically if the operator does not choose to refuel tanks frequently on stops at the terminus station.
However, in this case study, the route is quite short, and only 2 round trips are carried out during the day.
It should be noted that the Severn Lamb ULR is a hybrid. This usually consists of a diesel generator feeding a
hybrid series system, but a hydrogen fuel cell module could reasonably be fitted in place of the diesel
generator. In addition, a battery-only ULR option was modelled by assuming a 100 kWh battery pack per
vehicle to give a total of 500 kWh of storage and the same total power output of 840 kW. It is assumed that
the existing rolling stock consists of an 80-tonne locomotive (a typical weight for a locomotive of this size),
hauling five conventional coaches of 35 tonnes each. This gives a total of 255 tonnes for the train. However,
the mass of the ULR-based model, consisting of 5 vehicle configurations, was assumed to be 160 tonnes,
including 60 tonnes crush load.
In the absence of more accurate data, a line speed of 25 mph has been assumed for the model. The reason for
the relatively slow speed is that the line is mainly open with no boundary fence, so there is a significant risk of
collisions with pedestrians. It is also the case that most stations have no platforms or expected waiting areas,
and people commonly gather around the track.
Considering the specific energy and energy density of diesel and hydrogen fuel, 1 kg of hydrogen provides
33.3 kWh of energy; however, 1 litre of diesel fuel provides 10.96 kWh of energy [45] [46]. To match the
amount of kWh energy required for the completion of a round trip for the above-mentioned route, 14 kg of
hydrogen is required to be stored in hydrogen tanks. Since the ULR vehicle lacks regenerative braking, its
batteries can only be charged by the onboard fuel cell. However, the Kampala-Namanve line, being a regional
line with five stops, has great potential for generating regenerative energy that can be used to charge the
onboard batteries.

Figure 8: Illustrative Example of a ULR vehicle

2.2 Dar es Salaam – Kigoma line

Dar es Salaam to Kigoma route is a 1,200 km track in Tanzania that starts from Dar es Salaam on the Indian
ocean coast towards Kigoma on the shore of Lake Tanganyika. The track was built between 1905 and 1914,
starting from Dar es Salaam to Kigoma. The complete track is designed with a 1,000 mm narrow gauge. The
track comes with significant elevation gains throughout, such as towards Tabora, there is an elevation of
1,300 m; towards Mwanza, there is an elevation of 1,140 m and towards Kigoma, there a depression of 770 m
[47]. A more detailed illustration of the gradients, elevation, and calculations of each route can be found in
the Capability Analysis Report [35] of this project.

24
FINAL REPORT

The rolling stock operating on the above-mentioned route is a locomotive-hauled train with an average of 10
coaches, including sleepers and seated coaches. Since the lack of availability of data about a specific train that
operates on the mentioned route, an example locomotive EMD GT22C-3M was considered for simulation and
architectural design. The choice of locomotive took into account its wide use in the region, and the choice of
this locomotive for the simulation and architectural design appears to have been driven by practical
considerations such as availability, cost-effectiveness, and reliability. The locomotive weighs 110 tonnes and
comes with a gross power of 1,850 kW. It has a diesel-electric traction system and a capacity of 7,500 l of
diesel fuel [48].

Figure 9. External view of an EMD GT22C-3M locomotive [49]

Results from capability analysis indicate that a total of 12,394 l of diesel fuel is required to complete a round
trip from Dar es Salaam to Kigoma using a diesel-only locomotive. The fuel requirements include the +20% for
eventualities [35] presented in Table 16in the capability analysis report. On comparative analysis, the results
also indicate that only 1,498 kg of hydrogen would be required to complete a round trip from Dar es Salaam
to Kigoma for a hydrogen hybrid version and 12,719 l for a diesel hybrid version. The modelling parameters
such as velocity, mass, Davis parameters and traction powers of simulated trains are assumed to be the same
or nearest possible as the existing rolling stock.

2.3 Abuja – Kaduna line

The route Abuja-Kaduna in Nigeria is 185 km long and runs from the Nigerian capital Abuja to the city of
Kaduna. The track was built by China Civil and Engineering Construction company between 2011-2014. This
track is among the first modern standard gauge line in Nigeria. Currently, all passenger trains on this route are
cruising at a maximum speed of 100 kph consuming 2 hours of journey time for both sides. The track comes
with a moderate elevation at a few locations, as on the way back from Kaduna to Abuja, there are two major
elevation points [50].
The rolling stock operating on the above-mentioned route is a locomotive-hauled train with an average of 6
coaches, which includes seated coaches only. Since the lack of availability of data about a specific train that
operates on the mentioned route, an example locomotive GE U26 was considered for simulation and
architectural design. The choice of locomotive took into account its wide use in the region, and the choice of
this locomotive for the simulation and architectural design appears to have been driven by practical
considerations such as availability, cost-effectiveness, and reliability. The locomotive weighs 100 tonnes and
comes with a gross power of 1,500 kW. It has a diesel-electric traction system and a capacity of 7,500 l of
diesel fuel [51].

25
FINAL REPORT

Figure 10. An illustrative example of a GE U26 locomotive

Based on the results from the capability analysis report [35], the train that was simulated over the above-
mentioned route was assumed to be a set of 7 carriages, with a total mass of 340 tonnes, as presented in
Table 4. The simulated train comes with a total power of 1,500 kW, providing 120 kW for auxiliaries and 1,380
kW for traction. Simulation suggests that with an average speed of 100 km/h, the train took 4 hours for a
return trip from Abuja to Kaduna.
Results from capability analysis indicate that a total of 1,358.43 l of diesel fuel is required to complete a round
trip from Abuja to Kaduna by a diesel-only locomotive. To match the amount of kWh energy required for the
completion of a round trip for the above-mentioned route, 172.08 kg of hydrogen is required to be stored in
hydrogen tanks. The modelling parameters such as velocity, mass, Davis parameters and traction powers of
simulated trains are assumed to be the same or nearest possible as the existing rolling stock.

2.4 Volumetric analysis

The volumetric analysis combined the findings of the capability analysis with the detailed configuration of
locomotives and consisted of evaluating whether alternative traction systems would fit within the volumes
and the weight of existing assets to produce similar capabilities. The results from the simulation provided the
amount of hydrogen in kgs that would be necessary to fulfil the respective duty cycle.
The architectural design stage transformed the conceptual, quantitative assessment of the capability analysis
into a physical evaluation of assets and their suitability for conversion into an alternative system. This is an
important stage before any retrofitting study because it sheds light on whether alternative systems can be
fitted within existing rolling stock and infrastructure or whether changes to their concept of operations must
be made to address the different performance and capabilities.
With that, the volumetric analysis looked at the physical aspects of replacing the components related to
combustion engines in each locomotive with the components needed for a hydrogen hybrid system. Table 7
lists all components that were considered for the calculations.
Table 7. Components considered for volumetric analysis

Combustion engine components Hydrogen hybrid components

Fuel Tank (Dry) Fuel Cell Modules

Sand Tank (Empty) Fuel Cell Coolants

26
FINAL REPORT

Engine Battery Box Compressor/ Air subsystem

Auxiliary Battery Box Hydrogen Pipework, Valves & Ancillaries

Auxiliary Heating & Ventilation Unit Hydrogen Tanks

Alternator / Generator (GTA11 C.C) Hydrogen (H2)

Engine GE 7FDL-12 (wet) Battery Pack

Turbo Charger Traction Motors

Traction Motor GE-761A17 (x6) Insulated-gate bipolar transistor (IGBT)

Silencer & exhaust pipes Converter

Charged air cooler (nested pipework)

Lube Oil
Cooling Water Tank (Dry)

Miscellaneous/Others
Our results show that conventional vehicle operating on the shorter commuter route is feasible for
conversion based on the energy required for daily trips due to the lack of data available, which was based on
an illustrative use of modern ultra-light rail (ULR) vehicles in a similar configuration. Results show that a
battery-electric system would also suffice for the line, demonstrating potential feasibility in the use of
alternative traction for such cases.
The longer passenger and mixed traffic routes, however, showed opposite results. Both long-haul freight and
passenger locomotives require the storage of a large amount of hydrogen, which subsequently requires
installing a large number of hydrogen tanks. Since there isn’t any specific data available about different trains
where the number of installed tanks can be identified, therefore, it cannot be quantified in this specific area
other than providing a general expression about quantity and storage. This installation will technically
increase the overall weight and volume of the train. Both cases did not require much more weight than a
diesel equivalent but required a considerably larger volume (around 40% more), which is challenging at this
stage. Table 8 below summarises our findings.
Table 8. Summary of volumetric analysis for alternative traction systems in each case study

Case study Weight (kg) Volume (m3)

Commuter Line with ULR (Kampala – Namanve) Within Weight (-1.75%) Within Volume (-2.65%)

Mixed traffic long-distance (Dar es Salaam – Kigoma) Over-weight (+5.3 %) Over-volume (+37.7%)

Medium distance passenger (Abuja – Kaduna) Over-weight (+5.78%) Over-volume (+42.9%)

Despite case studies initially suggesting that ULR is a feasible choice as being within weight and volume, the
technology is still in development, and full-scale implementation is yet to be carried out by manufacturers. This
would require an entire overhaul of technology and regulatory capabilities. Therefore, ULR may not be deemed
a cost-effective solution for the “Kampala-Namanve” route.
Considering this, it was decided to proceed with the Tanzania case study because it was more realistic and
representative of sub-Saharan railway operations, especially those concerning the movement of goods. The
Standard Gauge line in Nigeria is still part of a select group of lines using more modern standards and, due to
economic and political issues, does not run freight services at the moment. It must be highlighted that our

27
FINAL REPORT

calculations at that stage maintained the concept of operations intact, meaning that the requirements were
based on the same duty cycles of diesel trains. Further discussions on a different concept of operations were
conducted in the retrofitting stage

28
FINAL REPORT

SECTION 5: RETROFITTING ANALYSIS

1. Introduction
The retrofitting analysis advanced the work of capability analysis and architectural design to investigate the
physical viability of novel traction systems. More specifically, it focuses on the retrofitting of the current fleet
of LICs into pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid versions based on volumetric analysis of the traction
requirements identified in the previous stages.
For this stage, only one case study was selected, that of the Dar es Salaam – Kigoma line in Tanzania for being
the most representative line of current services in Sub-Saharan Africa. The main objectives were to develop
multiple versions of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid railway fleets, analyse the possibility of Hydrogen as a
new alternative fuel for the LICs railway sector, and compare it with existing diesel counterparts.
This was achieved by developing sixteen models of existing trains, retrofitted with hydrogen fuel cells and
batteries assessed with 11 and 15 wagons configurations, including single and dual locomotive formations. The
configuration of consists was based on conversations with the Tanzania Railways Corporation. The retrofitted
models of the train were simulated on the 1,254 km metre gauge line.

1.1 Recent developments in Tanzania

Such distinction is important as the Tanzanian Railway Corporation is currently building a new Standard Gauge
Line. The construction of the central railway standard gauge involves the use of highly advanced technology
and power, which enables the increase of speed from 30km/h to 160km/h [52]. Moreover, the new standard
gauge railway line will also increase axle load from 13 tonnes to 35 tonnes [53]. The standard gauge central line
is being built into phases; phase one will be from Dar es Salaam to Mwanza (1219km), which is also
implemented in sections as follows [54]:
1. Dar es salaam- Morogoro (205 km),
2. Morogoro – Makutupora (336 km),
3. Makutupora- Tabora (km 249),
4. Tabora- Isaka (km 133) and,
5. Isaka- Mwanza (km 249).

Construction of the first section completed in 2022. For the rest of the sections, construction is expected to be
completed in November 2025. The SGR has a modern Signalling and Telecommunication (S&T) System based
on European Railway Traffic Management System (ERTMS-II) and GSM – R [55] [56].
Despite the significant advancements in the capacity that the new line will provide, TRC has highlighted that
the existing metre gauge line is still a valuable asset and will not be dismantled. Instead, it can be used for local
passenger and freight services and support the role of the railways in the country’s economic development.
With that, the investigation of alternative traction systems on the metre gauge line still holds relevance and
timeliness.

1.2 Current fleet and infrastructure

The TRC uses 23 GE U2C diesel-electric locomotives rated at 2,200 kW output power as their primary mover to
complete their railway transport operation. [57] In 2021, Tanzania Railway Corporation (TRC) awarded Hyundai
Rotem a KRW 335.4 billion (USD 280.67 million) contract to deliver 80 multiple electric units and 17 electric
locomotives expected to be delivered by 2024 [58]. The same year The Tanzania Railway Corporation (TRC)
received 44 freight wagons as part of a project (SGR) to upgrade the country’s central line to improve cargo
transportation [59].

29
FINAL REPORT

2. Analysis of concepts of operations (CONOPs)

This section describes the key parameters considered while developing the retrofitted train configurations. As
it was found in the volumetric analysis, the volume available on a locomotive would not be sufficient to cover
the entire length of the line between Dar es Salaam and Kigoma. Therefore, two alternative concepts of
operations (CONOPs) are analysed:
Refuelling stops
The first concept of operations maintains the existing configuration of one locomotive (and 11 or 15 wagons),
adding refuelling stops where necessary. This CONOP builds on the assumption that refuelling can be done
without detriment to existing timetables.
Range extender tanker
The second concept of operations includes a tanker car filled with hydrogen to extend the range of the fuel
cell system. The tanker is specifically pressurised at 350 bar to fit sufficient amounts of hydrogen that justify
its addition to length and weight. In contracts to smaller vehicles that use hydrogen pressurised at 700 bar,
railway vehicles only require 350 bar pressure to have a similar range to a gasoline vehicle due to the
available space on the top, bottom or inside of the railway vehicle to mount the hydrogen storage tanks [60].

2.1 Key elements of CONOPs

Four different basic sets of train formations were considered in the modelling of retrofitted trains:
• The first set of formations includes 11 wagons and one locomotive.
• The second set of formations includes 15 wagons and two locomotives.
• The third set of formations includes 11 wagons and one locomotive.
• The fourth set of formations includes 15 wagons and two locomotives.

On those, three types of traction systems were considered:

• Diesel: conventional combustion engine.
• Pure hydrogen: using hydrogen fuel cell systems.
• Hydrogen hybrid: combining fuel cell systems with batteries.
The extended version with the tanker was considered for both hydrogen systems.Error! Reference source not f
ound. Table 9 presents the components with the weight that has been removed from the existing diesel train
and the components that were added to the existing train to model the hybrid hydrogen version. The weight
of the existing diesel locomotive was 110 tonnes. After retrofitting the existing locomotive, the hybrid
hydrogen train weight resulted in 107 tonnes.

Table 9: Components removed from the diesel train and the components added to the hybrid train

Components Removed From Diesel Train Components Added To Hybrid Hydrogen Train
Components Weight (kg) Components Weight/Item Quantity Total
(kg) Weight (kg)

Diesel Fuel 5,762 Fuel Cell Modules 280 15 4,200

Fuel Tank (Dry) 2,345 Fuel Cell Coolants 44 15 660

Engine Battery Box 230 Compressor/ Air 61 15 915

subsystem

Auxiliary Battery Box 230 Hydrogen Pipework, 100 8 800

Valves & Ancillaries

30
FINAL REPORT

Auxiliary Heating & 100 Hydrogen Tanks 324 32 10,368

Ventilation Unit

Alternator / Generator 2,000 Hydrogen (H2) 27.8 32 889.6

(AR10)

Engine EMD 12-645E3C 12,800 IGBT Converter 300 6 1,800

(wet)

Turbo Charger 560 Battery 352 13 4,576

Silencer & exhaust pipes 172 Traction Motors 1800 6 10,800

Charged air cooler (nested 100

pipework)

Lube Oil 627

Cooling Water Tank (Dry) 787

Miscellaneous/Others 1,000

Traction Motors 10,800

Total 37,513 35,008

Detailed information on train formations is presented in Table 10 to Table 13.

Table 10: 11 wagon formation with one locomotive

11 Wagon formation with one locomotive

Parameters Diesel Pure Hydrogen Pure Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid
Hydrogen Hybrid Extender Extender

Locomotive Weight (Tonnes) 110 106 107 106 107

Empty wagon Weight (Tonnes) 30 30 30 30 30

Crush Load (Tonnes) 70 70 70 70 70

Hydrogen Tanker Weight (Tonnes) 0 0 0 46 46

Additional H2 Weight (Tonnes) 0 0 0 3 3

Total Weight (Tonnes) 1,210 1,206 1,207 1,255 1,256

Table 10 suggests a 0.33% and 0.25% decrease in the weight of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid retrofitted
versions of trains, respectively, compared to their diesel counterpart. However, a 3.7% and 3.80% weight
increase is observed in the extended version of pure hydrogen, and hybrid hydrogen retrofitted versions,
respectively, compared to the original diesel version. This is due to carrying an additional hydrogen tanker.

31
FINAL REPORT

Table 11: 15 wagons formation with one locomotive

15 Wagons formations with one locomotive

Parameters Diesel Pure Hydrogen Pure Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid
Hydrogen Hybrid Extended Extended

Locomotive Weight (Tonnes) 110 106 107 106 107

Empty wagon Weight (Tonnes) 30 30 30 30 30

Crush Load (Tonnes) 70 70 70 70 70

Hydrogen Tanker Weight (Tonnes) 0 0 0 46 46

Additional H2 Weight (Tonnes) 0 0 0 3 3

Total Weight (Tonnes) 1,610 1,606 1,607 1,655 1,656

Table 11 shows a 0.25% and 0.19% decrease in the weight of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid retrofitted
versions of trains, respectively, compared to their diesel counterpart. However, a 2.8% and 3.86 % weight
increase is observed in the extended version of pure hydrogen and hybrid hydrogen retrofitted versions,
respectively, compared to the original diesel version. This is due to carrying an additional hydrogen tanker.
Table 12: 11 wagons formation with two locomotives

11 Wagons formations with two locomotives

Parameters Diesel Pure Hydrogen Pure Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid
Hydrogen Hybrid Extended Extended

Locomotive Weight (Tonnes) 220 212 214 212 214

Empty wagon Weight (Tonnes) 30 30 30 30 30

Crush Load (Tonnes) 70 70 70 70 70

Hydrogen Tanker Weight (Tonnes) 0 0 0 46 46

Additional H2 Weight (Tonnes) 0 0 0 3 3

Total Weight (Tonnes) 1,320 1,312 1,314 1,361 1,363

Table 12 presents a 0.61% and 0.45% decrease in the weight of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid
retrofitted versions of trains, respectively, compared to their diesel counterpart. However, compared to the
original diesel version, a 3.11% and 3.26 % weight increase is observed in the extended version of pure
hydrogen and hybrid hydrogen retrofitted versions. This is due to carrying an additional hydrogen tanker.
Table 13: 15 wagons formation with two locomotive

15 Wagons formations with two locomotives

Parameters Diesel Pure Hydrogen Pure Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid
Hydrogen Hybrid Extended Extended

Locomotive Weight (Tonnes) 220 212 214 212 214

Empty wagon Weight (Tonnes) 30 30 30 30 30

32
FINAL REPORT

Crush Load (Tonnes) 70 70 70 70 70

Hydrogen Tanker Weight (Tonnes) 0 0 0 46 46

Additional H2 Weight (Tonnes) 0 0 0 3 3

Total Weight (Tonnes) 1,720 1,712 1,714 1,761 1,763

Table 13 suggests a 0.46% and 0.35% decrease in the weight of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid
retrofitted versions of trains, respectively, compared to their diesel counterpart. However, compared to the
original diesel version, a 2.4% and 2.5% weight increase is observed in the extended version of pure hydrogen
and hybrid hydrogen retrofitted versions. This is due to carrying an additional hydrogen tanker.

2.2 Simulation Results

The detailed results of simulations for each version of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid trains are
presented in Tables 14 to 17, along with the extended version of retrofitted trains. Each table shows the
hydrogen each train uses to complete the journey, along with its range and journey time. It should be noted
that each trip represents a return journey comprised of 2400 km, i.e. from Dar e Salaam to Kigoma and
Kigoma to Dar e Salaam.
Table 13 illustrates that the pure hydrogen train consumed 1,485 kg of hydrogen, and the hydrogen hybrid
consumed 1,528 kilograms of hydrogen to complete the returned journey in 55.48 hours with one refuelling
stop. However, the extended version of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid trains consumed 1,516 kg and
1,559 kg of hydrogen to complete the return trip in approximately 55.76 hours without any refuelling stop.
Table 14: 11 Wagons formation of retrofitted trains with one locomotive

11 Wagons formations with one locomotive

Parameters Diesel Pure Hydrogen Pure Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid

Hydrogen Hybrid Extended Extended

Available Hydrogen (kg) - 890 890 3,913 3,913

Hydrogen Consumption (kg) - 1,485 1,528 1,516 1,559

Available Diesel (Litres) 6,700 - - - -

Diesel Consumption (Litres) 9,362 - - - -

Energy Consumption (kWh) 102,606 49,495 50,917 50,536 51,951

Journey Time (Hours) 55.50 55.48 55.48 55.76 55.77

Range (km) 1,716 1,438 1,398 6,194 6,025

Refuelling Required 1 1 1 0 0

Total Trips (Full Return) 0 0 0 2 2

Table 14 presents that the 15 wagons formation of pure hydrogen train consumed 1,768 kg of hydrogen to
complete the returned journey in 57.76 hours with one refuelling stop. The hydrogen hybrid consumed 1,812
kilograms to complete the returned trip in 57.76 hours with two refuelling stops. However, the extended
version of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid trains consumed 1,806 kg and 1,852 kg of hydrogen to
complete the return trip in approximately 58.03 hours without any refuelling stop. The energy consumption in
Table 14 refers to the energy consumed by each train to complete the journey.

33
FINAL REPORT

Table 15: 15 Wagons formation of retrofitted trains with one locomotive

15 Wagons formations with one locomotive

Parameters Diesel Pure Hydrogen Pure Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid
Hydrogen Hybrid Extended Extended

Available Hydrogen (kg) - 890 890 3,913 3,913

Hydrogen Consumption (kg) - 1,768 1,812 1,806 1,852

Available Diesel (Litres) 6,700 - - - -

Diesel Consumption (Litres) 11,132 - - - -

Energy Consumption (kWh) 122,003 58,927 60,398 60,188 61,711

Journey Time (Hours) 57.78 57.76 57.76 58.03 58.03

Range (km) 1,445 1,208 1,179 5,200 5,072

Refuelling Required 1 1 2 0 0

Total Trips (Full Return) 0 0 0 2 2

Table 16 shows that the pure hydrogen train consumed 1,1807 kg of hydrogen, and the hydrogen hybrid
consumed 1,867 kilograms of hydrogen to complete the returned journey in approximately 52.29 hours with
one refuelling stop. However, the extended version of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid trains consumed
1,865 kg and 1,925 kg of hydrogen to complete the return trip in 52.47 hours without any refuelling stop.

Table 16: 11 Wagons formation of retrofitted trains with two locomotive

11 Wagons formations with two locomotives

Parameters Diesel Pure Hydrogen Pure Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid
Hydrogen Hybrid Extended Extended

Available Hydrogen (kg) - 1,780 1,780 4,803 4,803

Hydrogen Consumption (kg) - 1,807 1,867 1,865 1,925

Available Diesel (Litres) 13,400 - - - -

Diesel Consumption (Litres) 11,436 - - - -

Energy Consumption (kWh) 125,337 60,222 62,211 62,161 64,172

Journey Time (Hours) 52.32 52.29 52.30 52.47 52.47

Range (km) 2,812 2,364 2,289 6,181 5,987

Refuelling Required 0 1 1 0 0

Total Trips (Full Return) 1 0 0 2 2

Table 16 illustrates that the pure hydrogen train consumed 2,127 kg of hydrogen, and the hydrogen hybrid
consumed 2,194 kilograms of hydrogen to complete the returned journey in approximately 53.67 hours with
one refuelling stop. However, the extended version of pure hydrogen and hydrogen hybrid trains consumed
2,179 kg and 2,245 kg of hydrogen to complete the return trip in 53.81 hours without any refuelling stop.
34
FINAL REPORT

Table 17: 15 Wagons formation of retrofitted trains with two locomotive

15 Wagons formations with two locomotives

Parameters Diesel Pure Hydrogen Pure Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid
Hydrogen Hybrid Extended Extended

Available Hydrogen (kg) - 1,780 1,780 4,803 4,803

Hydrogen Consumption (kg) - 2,127 2,194 2,179 2,245

Available Diesel (Litres) 13,400 - - - -

Diesel Consumption (Litres) 13,441 - - - -

Energy Consumption (kWh) 147,312 70,883 73,127 72,635 74,835

Journey Time (Hours) 53.67 53.65 53.66 53.81 53.81

Range (km) 2,393 2,009 1,947 5,289 5,134

Refuelling Required 1 1 1 0 0

Total Trips (Full Return) 0 0 0 2 2

2.3 Hydrogen Production & Refuelling strategies

Each retrofitted locomotive can store about 890 kg of Hydrogen at 350 bar pressure. In dual locomotive
formation, the total available Hydrogen is 1,780 kg. Simulation results indicate that the non-extended version
trains required at least one refuelling stop at approximately 1,200 km distance to complete a return trip, except
the hydrogen hybrid locomotive with 15 wagons which requires 1,812 kg of hydrogen to complete the return
trip. Therefore, this version of the train will need two refuelling stops to complete the journey. In this case, the
requirement of completion of the given return journey, a minimum of one refuelling station is required at each
terminus station, i-e. Dar e Salaam and Kigoma. The hydrogen refuelling time is similar to its diesel counterpart
refuelling time [61], therefore not affecting the current timetable of the current operation. The methods that
can be used to produce hydrogen are given below.
Steam Methan Refrormation (SMR):
The energy required to produce hydrogen through SMR varies depending on several factors, including plant
efficiency and the source of energy used. According to a study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory
(NREL), the energy required to produce one kg of hydrogen through SMR ranges from 45-60 kWh, depending
on the efficiency of the plant and other factors [62].
Assuming the plant efficiency at 65% and an average energy requirement of 52.5 kWh/kg of hydrogen, we
would need a total of 88.846 kWh of energy to produce 1100 kg of hydrogen through SMR.
To calculate the amount of methane and water required. The balanced chemical equation for the SMR reaction
is:
CH4 + 2H2O -> CO2 + 4H2
From this equation, we can see that for every mole of methane (CH4) consumed, we need two moles of water
(H2O) to produce four moles of hydrogen (H2) [63]. To produce 1100 kg of hydrogen with an assumed efficiency
of 65%, we would require a total of 550 kg of methane, which is equivalent to 34.28 moles of methane. In
addition, we would require 2200 l of water, which is equivalent to 122.09 moles of water. These values are
calculated based on the stoichiometry of the SMR process, which requires 2 moles of water per mole of
methane to produce 4 moles of hydrogen and 1 mole of CO2 [64].
.
35
FINAL REPORT

Wind Power:
To determine the power required from a wind turbine to produce 1100 kg of hydrogen daily, the efficiency of
the wind turbine must be taken into account. If the wind turbine has an efficiency of 75%, then the power
required can be calculated by dividing the energy required by the efficiency and the amount of time available.
Using the calculated energy content of 1100 kg of hydrogen, the power required would be 77,733 kW, assuming
24 hours of operation [65].
Solar Farm:
The energy required to produce 1 kg of hydrogen by electrolysis is approximately 53 kWh [66]. Therefore, the
energy required to produce 1100 kg of hydrogen would be 58,300 kWh. Assuming that the sunlight is available
for 6 hours per day [67], the solar power required would be 9,717 kW. To calculate the number of solar panels
required, we need to consider the maximum output power of each panel. If the maximum output power of
each solar panel is 425W at 21.4% efficiency, then the number of panels required would be 22,864 solar panels
[68]. The efficiency of solar panels varies depending on the type of panel and environmental conditions. For
Tanzania, the average solar irradiance is approximately 4.8 kWh/m2/day. This value may vary depending on the
location and time of year [69].
Electrolyser:
In the case of the electrolyser, the production rate required to produce 1100 kg of hydrogen per day with an
efficiency of 70% can be calculated using the molar mass of hydrogen, the efficiency of the electrolyser, and
the desired daily production rate. Using the molar mass of hydrogen of 2.016 g/mol, the production rate
required would be 778.7 nm3/h [70].
Compressor:
The type of compressor required to compress hydrogen to 350 bars depends on the inlet pressure, the flow
rate, and the type of compressor. According to a study by Zou, J et al. (2020), a single-stage diaphragm
compressor with a flow rate of 200 Nm³/h can compress hydrogen from 30 bar to 350 bar [71].
For simplicity, the highest required hydrogen for a return trip is considered for cost analysis. In this case, that is
2,194 kg hydrogen for 15 wagons formation with two locomotives. This results in a 1,100 kg of hydrogen
requirement at each refuelling station. Currently, there is only one train per day service active on the route
used in this case study. Therefore, two refuelling stations are enough to provide the required amount of
hydrogen [72].
Table 18 presents the estimated costs and required quantity of equipment to develop a hydrogen refueling
station.
Table 18: Estimated costs of equipment required in production of hydrogen

Parameters Unit Price (£) Quantity Total (£) Sources

Wind Turbine (100 kW) 345,000 1 345,000 [73]

Solar Panels (425W) 156 22,864 3,566,784 [74]

Electrolyser (Proton Exchange 7,000,000 2 [75] [76] [77]

14,000,000
Membrane)

Compressor 50,000 1 50,000 [78]

Hydrogen Storage 50,000 1 50,000 [79]

Infrastruture Cost 1,100,000 1 1,100,000 [80]

36
FINAL REPORT

Table 19 presents the estimated operational and maintenance costs of the equipment used in hydrogen
refuelling stations, along with their service life. It is important to note that most of the costs could not be
obtained through public channels and hence were estimated using the available sources.
Table 19: Estimated costs of operation and maintenance wind turbine, solar farm and electrolyser

Parameters Unit Price (£) Source

Wind turbine O&M cost (£/kWh/yr) 0.02 [81] [82]

Solar farm O&M Cost (£/panel/year) 9.5 [83]

Electrolyzer O&M cost (£/kW/yr) 14.15 [81] [84]

Water cost (£/m3) 0.82 [81] [82]

Wind turbine service life (yrs) 20 [81]

Electrolyzer service life (yrs) 10 [81]

Solar Farm Service life (yrs) 25 [81]

Table 20 displays the costs and quantities of the components necessary to convert a single diesel-electric
locomotive into a hybrid hydrogen version, resulting in a total cost of around £1.8 million. The conversion
costs for the primary components are shown in detail in Table 20 [85].

Table 20: Estimated costs for retrofitting the hydrogen hybrid locomotive

Parameters Unit Price (£) Quantity Total (£)

Hydrogen Fuel Cell 75,000 14 1,050,000

Battery 200,000 2 400,000

IGBT 20,000 6 120,000

Hydrogen Tanks 2,000 32 64,000

Pipework, Valves and Auxiliaries 5,000 8 40,000

Air Compressor 5,000 14 70,000

Fuel Cell Radiator 2,000 14 28,000

Conversion Cost 60,000 1 60,000

Total Conversion Cost per Locomotive 0 0 1,832,000

Procurement of hydrogen:
Tanzania has significant potential for hydrogen production due to its abundant renewable energy sources
such as solar, wind, and hydro. However, the procurement of hydrogen in Tanzania is still in its infancy, with
limited infrastructure and production facilities in place.
Another challenge is the high cost of hydrogen production and storage infrastructure. The procurement of
hydrogen requires significant investment in the construction of production facilities, storage tanks,
transportation, and refuelling stations. There is a need for public-private partnerships and foreign investment
to fund the development of hydrogen infrastructure in Tanzania.

37
FINAL REPORT

In conclusion, the procurement of hydrogen in Tanzania is still in the early stages, with several challenges that
need to be addressed to promote its development. However, with the country's abundant renewable energy
sources and growing interest in hydrogen as a clean energy source, there is significant potential for the
growth of a hydrogen economy in Tanzania [86].

2.4 Added hydrogens wagons

In the extended version of hydrogen hybrid and pure hydrogen retrofitted trains, the formation carries an
additional tanker which stores approximately 3,023 kg of Hydrogen at 350 bar pressure. Simulation results
indicate that each formation of the extended version of the retrofitted train does not require refuelling during
the return trip. The additional hydrogen tanker provides a maximum range of 6,181 km. With this range, two
consecutive return trips can be made without refuelling. To analyse the trade-off between journey time and
weight increase in 11 wagon formations with one locomotive, the extended version of the hydrogen hybrid
train weight is increased by 4%; however, only a 0.5% increase is observed in journey time. Similarly, in 15
wagons formation with two locomotives, a 2.8% increase in weight is observed, resulting in only a 0.3%
increase in time. The extra weight of the train is so low that it has a neglectable effect on journey time.
The estimated cost of the tanker, including a custom-designed compressor and hydrogen delivery system, is
approximately £7.5 million. While this represents a significant one-time investment, it could potentially be
more cost-effective in the long run. It should be noted that this is a relatively new concept and has not been
implemented on a large scale for railway transport, so there may be some inconsistencies in cost analysis and
technology adoption. Further exploration of this option could be conducted in future research [87] [88].

3. Overall Comparative analysis of all CONOPs

Detailed information on retrofitting the current fleet, constructing a new refuelling station infrastructure, and
the associated costs are presented in section 3. It is observed in section three results that there is a slight
reduction in the overall weight of the retrofitted locomotive compared to its diesel counterpart, which
significantly reduces fuel consumption. Similarly, the 11 and 15-wagon formation with one locomotive
consumes less hydrogen due to low traction power resulting in longer journey time. Compared to one
locomotive version, the 11 and 15-wagon formation with two locomotives consumes approximately 22% more
hydrogen while reducing the journey time by about 7%. The selection of hydrogen hybrid train or pure hydrogen
train formation is exclusively based on the type of operation.
On the contrary, the extended version of the retrofitted train that carries an additional hydrogen tanker
significantly reduces the need for multiple refuelling stops at any point. The results from section 3 indicate that
an extended version of a hydrogen hybrid train in both 11 and 15 wagons formations with one locomotive
increases the range of the train by 330%, and two locomotives version increases the range of the train by 162%.
In both formations, the train can complete 2 round trips without refuelling.
It was estimated that converting a single diesel-electric locomotive to a hybrid hydrogen train would cost
approximately £1.8 million. The additional tanker that will be used with an extended version of the retrofitted
train could cost up to £7.5 million [87] [88] . The tank carries a hefty price tag because it is made of composite
material up to the standard where it withstands 350 bars of pressure. The price also includes a compressor and
hydrogen delivery system to the fuel cells installed onboard the locomotive.

4. Pathways for decarbonising an existing railway in low-income countries in SSA

The existing railway industry of LICs is very complex; therefore, each component of the railway industry, i-e.
Rail networks, train operating companies etc., should develop a delivery plan for decarbonisation. The
decarbonisation plan should include the following:
• An appropriate mix of zero-carbon traction technologies currently exists in the form of battery,
hydrogen and electrification.
• Includes a long-term target and outlines how this will be delivered through public or private
procurement and specification.
38
FINAL REPORT

• Allowing the railway industry to maximise its ability to innovate and deliver against the agreed target
most cost-effectively.

Currently, electric trains are considered the sole substitute for diesel that can operate freight or high-speed
passenger services with zero carbon emissions. However, electrification can be complicated and costly,
requiring significant upgrades to networks that were not originally designed for such infrastructure. In some
cases, the long-term benefits of electrification may not outweigh the investment cost and disruption caused by
engineering work. Therefore, finding a balance between cost, customer benefit, and achieving zero carbon
emissions is challenging. This is where other green traction technologies can serve as alternatives to diesel..
Rail electrification can certainly be a significant investment, involving substantial upfront costs for the
installation of the necessary infrastructure, such as overhead electrification cables and substations. However,
electric battery systems and hydrogen fuel cell systems have the potential to provide effective alternatives for
decarbonising rail transport without the same level of upfront costs. Developing a hydrogen supply network
and hydrogen train technology is likely to require a significant investment. However, such a supply network is
not limited to fuelling trains as hydrogen can be used to decarbonise other sectors of the economy and,
therefore, may contribute to the economies of scale to give LICs a competitive advantage in developing a new
global industry.
To compare the cost of hydrogen fuel cell systems for rail transport with full-scale electrification, a case study
was conducted by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in 2020 for the United Kingdom rail network. The study
found that the cost of hydrogen fuel cell systems is generally higher than full-scale electrification for both
upfront investment and operating costs [89].
For example, the study estimated that the cost of electrification for the UK rail network would be £19-24 billion,
while the cost of hydrogen fuel cell systems would be £32-45 billion. In terms of operating costs, the study
estimated that hydrogen fuel cell systems would be more expensive than electrification, with a cost of £0.16-
£0.21 per passenger-kilometer for hydrogen fuel cell systems compared to £0.12-£0.14 per passenger-
kilometer for electrification [90] [91].
However, it is worth noting that the cost of hydrogen fuel cell systems for rail transport is highly dependent on
various factors such as the cost of hydrogen production and infrastructure development. Moreover, hydrogen
fuel cell systems have the advantage of being more flexible and suitable for non-electrified lines or in cases
where electrification is not feasible.
Table 21 presents a brief comparison of various technologies that can be used in the decarbonisation of the
railway industry with its pros and cons.
Table 21: Pros and Cons of the different forms of traction systems

Technology Pros Cons

Electric Train Given that electricity is produced Electrification is expensive.

by renewable energy sources,
(Electrification)
electric trains are the only
alternative to diesel traction that
can run both fright and passenger
services at high speed with zero
carbon emissions.
Electric trains are quicker, lighter Because trains rely on overhead
and quieter compared to their line electrification, power outages
diesel counterparts. and mechanical problems can
occur. Passengers may be
inconvenienced.
39
FINAL REPORT

The process of electrifying train

lines has the potential to generate a
significant carbon footprint, which
should be counterbalanced by
implementing carbon-saving
measures.

Battery Batteries have the flexibility to be Longer distance journeys on

charged from a variety of sources, battery-powered trains are not
(Battery Powered Train)
such as overhead wires or (yet) feasible.
hydrogen fuel cells.
It is possible to retrofit batteries The rising demand for batteries due
into existing diesel rolling stock, to decarbonization initiatives is a
eliminating the need for new cause for concern, as it could lead
rolling stock. to an increase in battery costs.
Trains powered by batteries have
the flexibility to operate on both
electrified and non-electrified rail
networks.
Hydrogen Similar to battery power, There are challenges in
hydrogen trains can be used on a transporting and storing the fuel.
(Hydrogen-Powered Train)
combination of electrified and
non-electrified lines
Passengers benefit from At present, there is an absence of a
hydrogen trains because they are hydrogen economy as the existing
quieter than diesel trains and hydrogen production plants do not
more resilient to network-wide have sufficient capacity to support
disruption compared to electric the transportation sector.
trains. Therefore, the development of
production facilities and a
midstream supply chain is
necessary.
Good-quality diesel rolling stock To make hydrogen-powered trains
can be retrofitted with hydrogen a viable option, the availability of
fuel technology, making the hydrogen infrastructure will need
purchase of new rolling stock to be widespread throughout the
unnecessary. network, including at depots and
stations.

Hydrogen-based trains might be a

feasible solution for shorter
branch lines or railways where
electrification may be difficult.

40
FINAL REPORT

In summary, electric trains have been widely accepted as a reliable and eco-friendly option for decarbonizing
the railway industry. However, electrifying train lines requires a significant upfront investment and may face
technical, regulatory, and logistical challenges, which may affect its feasibility. In such cases, battery-powered
or hydrogen-powered trains offer a promising alternative for non-electrified railways. These technologies
have their own limitations, such as the availability of charging infrastructure, range, and cost. Battery-
powered trains, for example, may not be suitable for longer journeys due to their limited range and the need
for frequent recharging. On the other hand, hydrogen-powered trains require significant infrastructure
development for hydrogen production, storage, and distribution.
Therefore, it is essential to consider all the factors involved in each technology, including their benefits and
limitations, to determine the most appropriate and cost-effective decarbonization solution for the railway
industry. Policymakers, industry leaders, and other stakeholders need to work together to identify and
address the challenges associated with these technologies, such as infrastructure development, financing, and
regulatory frameworks. By doing so, they can facilitate the adoption of the most appropriate decarbonization
solutions and contribute to a more sustainable future for the railway industry.

41
FINAL REPORT

SECTION 6: CONCLUSION AND FURTHER STEPS

The project was set up to assess the feasibility and viability of introducing alternative traction systems to
railways in low-income countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. To do so, a sequence of activities based on modelling
and simulation tools progressed from the conceptual analysis of capability requirements to the tangible
concepts of operations for retrofitting existing railway assets to hydrogen-based systems.
Within the defined scope, we engaged with key stakeholders in the region to identify four main case studies
that were representative of the services encountered in Sub-Saharan Africa. Building on their inputs, the four
case studies were:
1. Kampala – Namanve – UGANDA – Commuter line
2. Buchanan – Tokadeh – LIBERIA – Heavy haul freight
3. Dar es Salaam – Kigoma – TANZANIA – Mixed use long distance
4. Abuja – Kaduna – NIGERIA – Medium distance passenger
Our Single Train Simulator (STS) tool was made available to practitioners and used against those case studies
to measure the power and energy requirements of each line. From those, it was observed that alternative
traction systems would help reduce overall emissions when compared to existing combustion engines, even if
the production of hydrogen was not entirely green. However, the exception was found in the heavy haul case
study where alternative traction systems are still behind the performance required to deliver the necessary
capabilities.
From there, the three remaining case studies were examined through a volumetric lens that analysed the
physical properties of the configurations used in each line. Data was found to be lacking, so representative
locomotives were assumed to measure whether it would be possible to fit the necessary amount of hydrogen
within existing assets. For the medium and long-distance services, results showed that more volume and
more weight would be required to deliver the same capabilities under the existing concept of operations.
As a result, the retrofitting analysis focused on the most representative case study (Tanzania) to examine
ways in which alternative traction systems could replace existing diesel locomotives. For that, two concepts of
operations were devised, either including refuelling stops on the line, or adding range extender tankers to the
consists. While the latter proved to provide considerable extra range, the costly design and materials would
make the solution more prohibitive than a refuelling station when their lifecycles are taken into
consideration.
Nonetheless, we anticipate both solutions as worthy of further evaluation. The scope of the project was
limited to the technical analysis of traction systems and therefore more detailed cost-benefit analyses should
be pursued. There are important idiosyncrasies in African railway lines in the form of gauge, standards, and
age of asses. Similarly there are distinct levels of renewable power generation that justify dedicated studies,
which were compiled in the Capability Analysis report. For instance, over 50% in Uganda and less that 12% in
Nigeria.
The project was set to deliver a general analysis of potential use and implementation of zero-carbon traction
systems in LICs in Sub-Saharan Africa. This was achieved with the use of simulation tools and other methods,
taking into account the uncertainty raised by missing and/or fragmented data. It is believed that the project
fulfilled its initial aims. Our pre-feasibility study showed that there is potential for conversion of existing
locomotives in Sub-Saharan Africa that can support the decarbonisation of the railway network in several
instances. Moreover, showing the potential existing lines can add important points to the ongoing discussion
between rehabilitation of legacy lines and the construction of Standard Gauge (SGR) lines. Even at this stage,
the project has raised substantial interest from industry, meaning that it holds very high research uptake
potential. The Short Course on Railway Decarbonisation opened a number of streams for collaborations with
railway stakeholders in Sub-Saharan Africa. It has also mobilised conversations with African development
organisations. Further research should build on this pre-feasibility study and elaborate more detailed analyses
on specific lines, using detailed blueprints of locomotives at feasibility leve. The team is now holding
conversations with the Tanzanian Railway Corporations and TransNamib to conduct specific simulation and
analysis work on their lines.
42
FINAL REPORT

43
FINAL REPORT

SECTION 7: DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES

The project prioritised dissemination activities to ensure appropriate awareness and research uptake were
achieved from the activities taken. These activities comprised key stakeholder workshops and steering board
meetings, conference presentations, and a dedicated short course.
Inevitably, the dissemination plan initially set required forced adjustments due to the disruptions caused by
the Covid-19 global pandemic. All efforts were made to maintain the plan unaltered, but some changes were
unavoidable, such as conferences that were cancelled and or activities that were prevented due to travel
restrictions.
Table 22. Review of project dissemination activities

Planned date Type Planned activity Resulting activity Commentary

Dec/2020 Webpage Official project webpage Completed

Dec/2020 Flyer Digital project flyer Flyer sent

Jan/2021 Workshop Key stakeholder workshop Workshop delivered

Jan/2021 Newsletter Project updates Delivered

March/2021 Press release Tool to calculate general Delivered

traction requirements

October/2021 Press release Traction systems architecture Delivered

report

October/2021 Conference Presentation at Africa Rail Delivered Online due to travel

conference restrictions

February/2022 Press release Prototype model dissemination Amended Prototype model

changed for virtual
model delivery

March/2022 Magazine article Sector leading publication Delivered Published on Electric

& Hybrid Rail
Technology
magazine

March/2022 Academic paper High impact journal In progress The project team is
finalising a draft
publication

April/2022 Press release Retrofitting reports Not achieved Changes in project

timeline meant that
this activity would
overlay with the
delivery of the short
course

June/2022 Conference Presentation at World Congress Achieved Stuart Hillmansen

of Railway Research chaired two sessions
on the topic of
railway
decarbonisation

44
FINAL REPORT

July/2022 Conference Presentation at Africa Rail 2022 Not achieved Event postponed to
July/2023

September/2022 Conference Presentation at Transport Achieved Invitation extended

Evolution Africa to present at 2023
edition

Workshops
Two workshops were held in 2021. The first workshop was held in January, where key stakeholders helped
the team choose appropriate and relevant case studies. A steering board meeting was held in May, where
selected experts joined the project as advisors to review our current progress and provided recommendations
on the scientific work.
Attendance to both was recorded, and listed on Tables 23 and 24.
Table 23. Attendance list of key stakeholder workshop in January 2021

Organisation represented Country Gender

Nigerian Ministry of Transportation Nigeria M

Rwanda Transport Development Agency Rwanda M

Managing Director - Uganda Railways Uganda M

COWI Uganda Uganda F

Rail Working Group Switzerland M

Ethiopian Railways Corporation Ethiopia M

Ethiopian Railways Corporation Ethiopia M

Ethio-Djubouti Railway Corp Ethiopia M

Ethio-Djubouti Railway Corp Ethiopia M

Uganda Railway Corporation Uganda M

Table 24. Attendance list of steering board meeting in May 2021

Organisation represented Country Gender

Ethiopian Railways Corporation Ethiopia M

Rwanda Transport Development Agency Rwanda M

Rwanda Ministry of Infrastructure Rwanda M

Rail Working Group Switzerland M

Michigan State University USA M

Railway Industry Association UK M

45
FINAL REPORT

Conferences
The team was invited to present outputs at four conferences:
Transport Evolution Africa 2021 – Peter Amor presented virtually
Transport Evolution Africa 2022 – Dr Marcelo Blumenfeld presented in person
InnoTrans 2022 – Prof Stuart Hillmansen presented in person
COP27 – Prof Clive Roberts presented in person
Short course on railway decarbonisation
The most important activity in the dissemination endeavours of the project culminated in the development
and delivery of a Short Course on Railway Decarbonisation. Invitations were sent online, reaching uses
through social platforms. Flyers were also handed two conferences (InnoTrans and Transport Evolution Africa)
to invite applications (Figure 11).

Figure 11. Flyer for Short Course on Railway Decarbonisation

A total of 82 applications were received, and 40 railway stakeholders from 15 countries were selected to join
the course in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The course takes place between the 28th November 2022 and 2nd
December 2022 and covers the technical aspects of railway dercabonisation. Interim photos on Figure 11 and
list of participants on Table 21.

46
FINAL REPORT

Figure 12. Photos from the Short Course on Railway Decarbonisation

Table 25. List of participants of the Short Course on Railway Decarbonisation

Role Gender Country Organisation represented

SLOCAT Partnership on Sustainable Low Carbon
Policy Analysis and Advocacy - Junior Officer Male Cameroon Transport
Rolling Stock Maintenance Engineer Male DRC Addis Ababa Light Rail
SHEQ Manager Male Eswatini Eswatini Railways
Traction manager Male Eswatini Eswatini Railways
Chief Safety Officer Male Ethiopia Ethio-Djibouti Railways
Chief of Staff Male Ethiopia Ethio-Djibouti Railways
Lead Safety Expert Male Ethiopia Ethio-Djibouti Railways
Chief Operations Officer Male Ethiopia Ethio-Djibouti Railways
Construction planning dispatcher Female Ethiopia Ethio-Djibouti Railways
Engineer Male Ghana Ministry of Railway Development
Regional Civil Engineer - Infrastructure Male Kenya Kenya Railways Corporation
Technical Officer Male Kenya Ministry of Transport
Senior Environment Officer Female Kenya Kenya Railways Corporation
MSc student Female Kenya University of Nairobi
Head Of Operations Male Malawi Netic Trading
Senior Engineer: R&D Male Namibia TransNamib
Lecturer in Railway Management Male Nigeria Redeemer's University
Lecturer in Railway Management Male Nigeria Redeemer's University
Structural Engineer Female Rwanda Rwanda Housing Authority
PhD candidate Female Uganda Lund University
Corporate Planning Male Uganda Uganda Railways Corporation (URC)
Planning officer Female Uganda Uganda Railways Corporation (URC)
Civil Engineer Male Uganda State House- Kampala
Head of safety management system cell Male Senegal Grands Train of Senegal ( GTS - SA)
Technical Director Male Senegal Grands Train of Senegal ( GTS - SA)
General Manager Male Sudan Sudan Railways Corporation
Deputy General Manager for Infrastructure Male Sudan Sudan Railways Corporation
Senior Civil Engineer Female Sudan Sudan Railways Corporation
Senior Electrical Engineer Female Sudan Sudan Railways Corporation

47
FINAL REPORT

Principal registration and licensing officer Male Tanzania Land Transport Regulatory Authority (LATRA)
Safety manager Male Tanzania Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority ( TAZARA )
Senior Mechanical Engineer Male Tanzania Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority ( TAZARA )
Civil Engineer Female Tanzania Tanzania Railways Corporation
Electrical engineer Male Tanzania Tanzania Railways Corporation
Commercial officer Female Tanzania Tanzania Railways Corporation
Senior Transport Officer Male Tanzania Tanzania Railways Corporation
Director of Railway Regulation Male Tanzania Land Transport Regulatory Authority ( LATRA )
Senior Railway Safety Inspector Male Tanzania Land Transport Regulatory Authority ( LATRA )
Engineering Superintendent - Signals and
Telecommunications Male Zambia Zambia Railways Limited
Engineer Signals & Telecommunication Male Zambia Zambia Railways Limited

SECTION 8: REFERENCES

[1] African Development Bank, “Rail Infrastructure in Africa: Financing Policy Options,” African
Development Bank, Abidjan, 2015.

[2] M. Blumenfeld, “Exploring the potential synergies between railway electrification and grid expansion,”
in Electromobility and Renewable Electricity: Developing Infrastructure for Synergies, Washington, D.C.,
Sum4ALL, 2022.

[3] Economic Times, “Railways to spend Rs 12,134 crore over three years to achieve 100% electrification,”
[Online]. Available: https://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/power/railways-to-spend-rs-
12134-crore-over-three-years-to-achieve-100-electrification/67299220. [Accessed 2020 12 21].

[4] Railway Industry Association, “RIA Electrification Cost Challenge,” [Online]. Available:
https://www.nsar.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/RIAECC.pdf. [Accessed 2020 12 22].

[5] World Bank, “Access to electricity (% population),” [Online]. Available:

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.ELC.ACCS.ZS. [Accessed 2020 12 20].

[6] D. Shirres, “Could hydrogen trains be the future of rail?,” [Online]. Available:
https://www.imeche.org/news/news-article/could-hydrogen-trains-be-the-future-of-rail. [Accessed 20
12 2020].

[7] United Nations Department Of Economic and Social Affairs Statistics Division, “Standard country or
area codes for statistical use,” United Nations, New York, 1999.

[8] J. Shvili, “Sub-Saharan Africa,” World Atlas, 28 10 2021. [Online]. Available:

https://www.worldatlas.com/regions/sub-saharan-africa.html. [Accessed 05 01 2023].

[9] World Bank, “World Bank country and lending groups,” 01 01 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-
lending-groups. [Accessed 01 02 2021].

48
FINAL REPORT

[10] United Nations Development Programme, “Latest Human Development Index Ranking,” [Online].
Available: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/latest-human-development-index-ranking. [Accessed 01 02
2021].

[11] M. Blumenfeld, W. Wemakor, L. Azzouz and C. Roberts, “Developing a New Technical Strategy for Rail
Infrastructure in Low-Income Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia,” Sustainable High
Volume Road and Rail Transport in Low Income Countries); MDPI, vol. 11, no. 16, 2019.

[12] R. Bullock, “Off track: SSA railways,” World Bank, Washington, D.C., 2009.

[13] V. N. Olievschi, “Railway transport: framework for improving railway sector performance in SSA,”
World Bank, Washington, D.C., 2013.

[14] M. Blumenfeld, W. Wemakor, L. Azzouz and C. Roberts, “Developing a New Technical Strategy for Rail
Infrastructure in Low-Income Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia,” Sustainability, vol. 11,
no. 16, 2019.

[15] African Development Bank, “Rail infrastructure in Africa: financing policy options,” African
Development Bank, Abidjan, 2015.

[16] World Bank, “Africa Infrastructure: Railways,” 31 12 2009. [Online]. Available:

https://databank.worldbank.org/source/africa-infrastructure:-railways. [Accessed 01 02 2020].

[17] Bollore Logistics, “Registration document,” Bollore, Paris, 2018.

[18] International Union of Railways, “RAIL-ISA UIC Statistics,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://uic-
stats.uic.org/. [Accessed 15 01 2020].

[19] ArcelorMittal, “Sustainability Report 2017,” ArcelorMittal, Buchanan, 2017.

[20] MADARAIL, “A propos de Madarail,” [Online]. Available:

http://www.madarail.mg/a_propos_activites.php. [Accessed 09 02 2021].

[21] Government of Malawi, “Statistical Yearbook 2021,” National Statistical Office, Lilongwe, 2021.

[22] National Bureau of Statistics, “Rail Transportation Data 2021,” National Bureau of Statistics, Abuja,
2022.

[23] Ministry of Works and Transport, “Transport and meteorology sector statistics,” Ministry of Works and
Transport, Dodoma, 2019.

[24] Caminhos de Ferro de Mozambique, “Annual Statistical Information 2021,” Caminhos de Ferro de
Mozambique, Maputo, 2021.

[25] Uganda Bureau of Statistics, “Statistical Abstract 2021,” Uganda Bureau of Statistics, Kampala, 2021.

[26] World Bank, “Railways, goods transported, tonne-km,” [Online]. Available:

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.RRS.GOOD.MT.K6. [Accessed 03 02 2023].

49
FINAL REPORT

[27] World Bank, “The economics of Rail Gauge on the East African Commmunity,” World Bank,
Washington, DC, 2013.

[28] S. Oirere, “Kenyan court quashes mandatory use of SGR for freight,” 25 November 2020. [Online].
Available: https://www.railjournal.com/africa/kenyan-court-quashes-mandatory-use-of-sgr-for-
freight/. [Accessed 12 July 2021].

[29] G. A. Gallopin, A. Hammond, P. Raskin and R. Swart, “Branch points: global scenarios and human
choice,” Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, 1997.

[30] C. Roberts, S. Hillmansen and M. Blumenfeld, “TRAFFIC VOLUME REPORT - Novel traction systems,”
HIgh Volume Transport, Birmingham, 2021.

[31] African Union, “Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want,” African Union, Addis Ababa, 2013.

[32] CPCS, “Detailed Scoping Study (DSS) for Vision 2063 Africa Integrated High Speed Railway Network and
Masterplan,” CPCS, Ottawa, 2019.

[33] C. Calvert, N. Zhao and P. Amor, “SIMULATION REPORT - Novel traction systems for sustainable railway
futures in LICs,” High Volume Transport, Birmingham, 2021.

[34] T. Din and S. Hillmansen, “Energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions analysis for a concept
design of a hydrogen hybrid railway vehicle,” IET Electrical Systems in Transportation, vol. 1`, p. 10,
2017.

[35] C. Calvert, “CAPABILITY ANALYSIS REPORT,” High Volume Transport Applied Research, Birmingham,
2022.

[36] Rail Insider, “Urban Very Light Rail gets powerful new innovation,” 25 07 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://railinsider.co.uk/2022/07/25/urban-very-light-rail-gets-powerful-new-innovation/. [Accessed
03 02 2023].

[37] Uganda Railways Corporation, “Schedules,” [Online]. Available: https://urc.go.ug/schedules. [Accessed

03 02 2023].

[38] Tanzania Railways Corporation, “Long Distance Train,” [Online]. Available:

https://www.trc.co.tz/pages/long-distance-train. [Accessed 03 02 2023].

[39] Munzungu, “On the right track : My first Ugandan train ride,” 13 12 2015. [Online]. Available:
https://www.muzungubloguganda.com/adventure/rift-valley-railways-kampala-train/. [Accessed 1 08
2022].

[40] RailSistem, “Liberian Railway Could Carry Iron Ore From Guinea,” 06 05 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://en.railsistem.com/2019/05/06/liberian-railway-could-carry-iron-ore-from-guinea/. [Accessed 1
08 2022].

[41] Geo Parks, “Tanzania Revives Northbound Train Journeys, Cashing On Christmas Holidays Season,” 06
11 2021. [Online]. Available: https://geoparks.taifatanzania.com/dar-arusha-train-journeys-revived-
again-for-christmas/. [Accessed 01 08 2022].

50
FINAL REPORT

[42] Sinfin, “Railways in Nigeria,” Not Dated. [Online]. Available:

https://www.sinfin.net/railways/world/nigeria.html. [Accessed 23 02 2023].

[43] URC, “Passenger Services,” Uganda Railways Corporation, Not Dated. [Online]. Available:
http://urc.go.ug/services/passenger-services. [Accessed 07 01 2023].

[44] H. Mbabazi, “Uganda Railways Resumes Commuter Train Services In Kampala,” 09 08 2021. [Online].
Available: https://thecapitaltimes.co.ug/2021/08/09/uganda-railways-resumes-commuter-train-
services-in-kampala/. [Accessed 07 01 2023].

[45] J. Ivy, “Summary of Electrolytic Hydrogen Production: Milestone Completion Report,” National
Renewable Energy Lab., Golden, CO (US), vol. 1, p. 27, 2004.

[46] Action of Sustainability, “Converting Fuel to kWh and CO2e,” 11 2010. [Online]. Available:
https://travelifestaybetter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/17-Fuel-Conversion-Rates-to-kWh-and-
CO2e.pdf. [Accessed 03 01 2023].

[47] Madenge, “Central Line (Tanganyika Railway) – History, Traffic,” The United Repulic of Tanzania, 17 10
2021. [Online]. Available: https://unitedrepublicoftanzania.com/economy-of-tanzania/infrastructure-
in-tanzania/railway-in-tanzania/central-line-tanganyika-railway-history-traffic/. [Accessed 07 01 2023].

[48] Robert Coleman, “GT22 Co-Co Narrow Gauge Diesel Electric Locomotives for Sale,” RAIL ENGINEERING
SOLUTIONS LLC, Not Dated. [Online]. Available: https://www.locomotives-for-sale.com/Rolling-
Stock/Locomotives-Multiple-Units/Co-Co-Diesel-Electric-GT22C-Locomotives-For-Sale/. [Accessed 07
01 2023].

[49] Rail Engineering Solutions LLC, “GT22 Co-Co Narrow Gauge Diesel Electric Locomotives for Sale,” 2022.
[Online]. Available: https://www.locomotives-for-sale.com/Rolling-Stock/Locomotives-Multiple-
Units/Co-Co-Diesel-Electric-GT22C-Locomotives-For-Sale/. [Accessed 23 2 2023].

[50] Unknown, “Abuja-Kaduna Rail Line,” Railway Technology, 20 01 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.railway-technology.com/projects/abuja-kaduna-rail-line/. [Accessed 07 01 2023].

[51] J.-D. BACHAND, “General Electric U26C,” 11 11 2007. [Online]. Available:

https://www.thedieselshop.us/Data%20U26C.HTML. [Accessed 07 01 2023].

[52] AE, “TANZANIA TESTS ELECTRIC TRAIN ON NEW SGR LINE, HITS 160 KM/H TOP SPEED,” AE Africa Equity
Media, 06 06 2022. [Online]. Available: https://africaequity.net/tanzania-electric-train-test-on-new-
sgr-line-hits-160km-h-top-speed/. [Accessed 14 01 2023].

[53] ATQnews, “Africa: Tanzania new Standard gauge Railway with speed of 160kmh is expected to be the
best in Africa when it opens in 2019,” atqnews.com, 13 02 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://atqnews.com/tanzania-new-standard-gauge-railway/. [Accessed 14 01 2023].

[54] Tanzania Invest, “SGR Tanzania Standard Gauge Railway,” Tanzaniainvest, 22 12 2022. [Online].
Available: tanzaniainvest.com/sgr. [Accessed 10 01 2023].

[55] T. R. Carporation, “Environmental and Social Management and Monitoring Plan,” August 2019.
[Online]. Available: https://yapimerkezi.com.tr/PdfDosyalari/937ee522-ccda-4185-9794-
1543e1551085.pdf.

51
FINAL REPORT

[56] H. Nachilongo, “The Citizen,” Epaper, April 2022. [Online]. Available:

https://www.thecitizen.co.tz/tanzania/news/national/tanzania-s-sgr-to-start-operations-by-end-of-
april-2022-3779770. [Accessed 02 November 2022].

[57] TAZARA, “Types of Freight and Vehicles,” TANZANIA-ZAMBIA RAILWAY AUTHORITY, N.D. [Online].
Available: https://tazarasite.com/types-freight-and-vehicles. [Accessed 02 November 2022].

[58] R. Technology, “Rail Target,” Hyundai Rotem wins contract to deliver train cars to Tanzania, 07 07
2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.railway-technology.com/news/hyundai-rotem-tanzania/.
[Accessed 02 November 2022].

[59] H. Mhagama, “Tanzania: TRC Receives 44 Freight Wagons for Central Line,” Tanzania Daily News (Dar
es Salaam), 7 10 2021. [Online]. Available: https://allafrica.com/stories/202110070379.html. [Accessed
02 November 2022].

[60] Knowledge Base, “COMPRESSED GASEOUS HYDROGEN ON 350 BAR,” Fuel Cell Electric Busses
Knowledge Base, Not Dated. [Online]. Available: https://www.fuelcellbuses.eu/wiki/fuelling-hydrogen-
buses-hydrogen-refueling-station/compressed-gaseous-hydrogen-350-bar. [Accessed 14 01 2023].

[61] J. Sampson, “Hydrogen refuelling stations: explained,” H2 View, 21 12 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.h2-view.com/story/hydrogen-refuelling-stations-explained/. [Accessed 14 01 2023].

[62] C. S. M. a. J. B. Bierschenk, “Energy Requirements for Hydrogen Gas Production," National Renewable
Energy Laboratory,” Technical Report NREL/TP-570-27719, 2000.

[63] A. E. L. Adam P. Simpson, “Exergy analysis of hydrogen production via steam methane reforming,”
International Journal of Hydrogen Production, vol. 32, no. 18, pp. 4811-4820, 2007.

[64] ,. Q. S. Z. J. S. G. A. S. Luning Chen, “Catalytic Hydrogen Production from Methane: A Review on Recent
Progress and Prospect,” Nanocatalysts for Hydrogen Production, vol. 10, no. 8, 2020.

[65] M. S. M. M. A. M. Mostafa Rezaei, “Investigation of the socio-economic feasibility of installing wind

turbines to produce hydrogen: Case study,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 43, no. 52,
pp. 23135-23147, 2018.

[66] Short-fact, “How much energy does it take to produce 1kg of hydrogen?,” 21 02 2021. [Online].
Available: https://short-fact.com/how-much-energy-does-it-take-to-produce-1kg-of-hydrogen/.
[Accessed 24 02 2023].

[67] SmartSolar Tanzania, “Solar Power Potential Tanzania,” 01 08 2018. [Online]. Available:
http://www.smartsolar-tanzania.com/solar-sector-information/solar-power-potential-tanzania/.
[Accessed 24 02 2023].

[68] Solarsunever, “Original 600W 9BB Half Module Solar Panel Good Price Photovoltaic Single Crystal
600W Solar Panel,” 01 01 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.solarsunever.com/original-600w-9bb-
half-module-solar-panel-good-price-photovoltaic-single-crystal-600w-solar-panel_p126.html.
[Accessed 24 02 2023].

[69] A. C. D. A. Aboginije Ademilade, “The Application of ”Green Technology” In the Modern Day
Construction Projects-A Review,” EasyChair preprints, 2020.

52
FINAL REPORT

[70] D. L. F. J. M. D. S. Marcelo Carmo, “A comprehensive review on PEM water electrolysis,” International

Journal of Hydrogen Energy, vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 4901-4934, 2013.

[71] N. H. J. Y. Q. F. Y. W. Z. Z. J. F. L. Z. H. L. &. H. W. Jiexin Zou, “Electrochemical Compression Technologies

for High-Pressure Hydrogen: Current Status, Challenges and Perspective,” Electrochemical Energy
Reviews, vol. 3, pp. 690-729, 2020.

[72] TRC, “Long Distance Train,” TANZANIA RAILWAYS CORPORATION, Not Dated. [Online]. Available:
https://www.trc.co.tz/pages/long-distance-train. [Accessed 14 01 2023].

[73] Checkatrade, “Wind turbine cost guide,” 31 03 2022. [Online]. Available:

https://www.checkatrade.com/blog/cost-guides/wind-turbine-cost/. [Accessed 24 02 2023].

[74] Midsummer, “Trina Vertex S 425W Black Framed Mono (white backsheet),” Trina, 01 10 2022. [Online].
Available: https://midsummerwholesale.co.uk/buy/trina/trina-425w. [Accessed 24 02 2023].

[75] IEA, “Renewable Energy Policies and Market Overview: Hydrogen,” International Energy Agency (IEA),
2021.

[76] E. P. Yamini P, “Electrolyzers Market Outlook 2027,” Allied Market Research, 01 03 2021. [Online].
Available: https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/electrolyzer-market-A10609. [Accessed 24 02 2023].

[77] NEL, “Containerized PEM Electrolyser,” Nel Hydrogen, 01 11 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://nelhydrogen.com/product/m-series-containerized/. [Accessed 24 02 2023].

[78] Haskel, “Hydraulic compression skids for hydrogen filling,” 01 11 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://www.haskel.com/en-gb/products/hydrogen-refuelling/hydrogen-compression-and-
transfer/hydraulic-hydrogen-compression-skid. [Accessed 24 02 2023].

[79] Hexagon Purus, “Hexagon Purus AS - Type 4 Composite Pressure Vessel,” Hydrogen fuel storage
systems, 01 11 2022. [Online]. Available: https://hexagonpurus.com/our-solutions/hydrogen-
systems/fuel-storage-systems. [Accessed 24 02 2023].

[80] M. M. Mariya Koleva, “Hydrogen Fueling Stations Cost,” 11 02 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/21002-hydrogen-fueling-station-cost.pdf. [Accessed 02
November 2022].

[81] J. M. A. K. Babatunde Olateju, “Large scale hydrogen production from wind energy for the upgrading,”
Applied Energy, vol. 118, pp. 48-56, 2014.

[82] A. K. Babatunde Olateju, “Hydrogen production from wind energy in Western Canada for upgrading
bitumen from oil sands,” Energy, vol. 36, no. 11, pp. 6326-6339, 2011.

[83] Check Trade, “https://www.checkatrade.com/blog/cost-guides/solar-panel-maintenance-cost/,” Solar

panel maintenance cost guide, 04 10 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://www.checkatrade.com/blog/cost-guides/solar-panel-maintenance-cost/. [Accessed 24 02
2023].

[84] B. O, “Renewable Hydrogen from Wind in California,” National Hydrogen Association Proceddings,
2005.

53
FINAL REPORT

[85] S. H. Tajud Din, “Energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions analysis for a concept design of a
hydrogen hybrid railway vehicle,” IET, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 112-121, 2018.

[86] IEA, “The Future of Hydrogen: Seizing Today’s Opportunities,” International Energy Agency, 2020.

[87] C. Driver, “Truck Net Uk,” Liquid Hydrogen Tanker, 08 November 2013. [Online]. Available:
https://www.trucknetuk.com/phpBB/gallery/image_page.php?album_id=996&image_id=4313.
[Accessed 02 November 2022].

[88] J. M. Group, “Alibaba,” Energy-saving reliable stable and professional cng gas compressor, 2022.
[Online]. Available: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Energy-saving-reliable-stable-and-
professional_1600479449856.html?spm=a2700.shop_plgr.41413.3.208f2b9aUs2kZt. [Accessed 02
November 2022].

[89] IEA, “The Future of Rail 2050,” International Energy Agency, 2020.

[90] Railway Technology, “Electrification cheaper than hydrogen for UK rail decarbonisation, says IEA,” 17
11 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.railway-technology.com/news/electrification-cheaper-than-
hydrogen-for-uk-rail-decarbonisation-says-iea/. [Accessed 24 02 2023].

[91] IEA, “Electrification,” IEA, Paris, 2022.

[92] BBC, “Next stop, hydrogen-powered trains,” 27 02 2020. [Online]. Available:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200227-how-hydrogen-powered-trains-can-tackle-climate-
change. [Accessed 16 12 2020].

[93] Railway Technology, “HydroFLEX hydrogen train,” [Online]. Available: https://www.railway-

technology.com/projects/hydroflex-hydrogen-train/. [Accessed 19 12 2020].

[94] T. Burridge, “All aboard Britain’s first hydrogen train,” 20 06 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48698532. [Accessed 16 12 2020].

[95] D. Briginshaw, “Report confirms Britain can meet 2040 diesel-free-train target,” 22 07 2019. [Online].
Available: https://www.railjournal.com/policy/britain-can-meet-2040-diesel-free-train-%20target/.
[Accessed 17 12 2020].

[96] N. Pocard, “Zero Emission Fuel Cells,” Ballard, 11 February 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://blog.ballard.com/fuel-cell-price-drop. [Accessed 02 November 2022].

[97] E. G. UK, “Energy Guide,” Solar Panel Costs Calculator UK Guide, November 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://energyguide.org.uk/solar-panel-costs-calculator/. [Accessed 05 November 2022].

[98] H. K. Kantola, “Cost of Hydrogen Fueling Infrastructure,” Hydrogen Cars Now, 03 07 2088. [Online].
Available: https://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/index.php/infrastructure/cost-of-hydrogen-fueling-
infrastructure/. [Accessed 02 November 2022].

[99] H. S. Maps, “COSTS AND FINANCING,” Hydrogen Fuel Cell Partnership, N.D.. [Online]. Available:
https://h2stationmaps.com/costs-and-financing. [Accessed 02 November 2022].

54
FINAL REPORT

[100] H. Mbabazi, “Uganda Railways Resumes Commuter Train Services In Kampala,” 09 08 2021. [Online].
Available: https://thecapitaltimes.co.ug/2021/08/09/uganda-railways-resumes-commuter-train-
services-in-kampala/. [Accessed 07 01 2023].

55
Birmingham Centre for Railway Research and Education
University of Birmingham
Edgbaston, Birmingham
B15 2TT, United Kingdom
Tel: +44(0) 121 414 2626
Email: [email protected]
Web: https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/railway/index.aspx