Greener by Car

According to a report published by RSSB, rail is not necessarily the “green” option for long distance travel in the UK.

It can be greener to drive than catch the train, according to a rail industry study which reveals that trains are losing their environmental advantage.

Modern diesel-powered trains are so polluting that a family of three or more would be responsible for at least double the carbon dioxide emissions on many routes when travelling by rail compared with driving in a typical medium-sized car.

Ouch! A decade ago, the rail industry trumpeted its green credentials with some vigour – they managed to conveniently overlook the clouds of diesel wafting above Paddington station in favour of the volume of people carried for the cost of that pollution and that less land is required to contain a railway line than a motorway. All good stuff, but… The HST is now obsolete and being replaced with more modern and one would have thought, efficient stock, no?

The study concludes that the Virgin Voyager, the most advanced diesel train on the network, has the highest emissions of any British train and that its performance compared with cars is steadily worsening as motor manufacturers improve efficiency.

That’s a pretty dreadful indictment. Fuel and emissions efficiency shouldn’t be too difficult to manage – the automotive industry have been improving why not rail? Mention of the Voyager is to mention one of my least liked trains – the only one I despise more is the Adelante used on the Great Western main line. Both trains are cramped, cold, noisy, uncomfortable and cheap – and I don’t mean the cost, I mean they are shoddy. Frankly, If I have the choice of an Adelante now or an HST in half an hour’s time, I’ll wait the half hour for the improved comfort. The train operators have opted to reduce quality of ride and passenger comfort, which is bad enough, but that they have seen fit to buy stock that is no less fuel and emissions efficient despite over twenty years worth of technological advantage is a disgrace. Well, the TOCs, Angel Leasing or the government or all three…

The study, commissioned by the Rail Safety and Standards Board, urges the Government to electrify key sections of the rail network to allow greener electric trains to replace diesel ones. On several long-distance routes, such as London to Hull, diesel trains run long distances under electric wires because short stretches of track have not been electrified.

Having travelled on GNER’s electric stock, I can concur that this is a ride similar in comfort to the HST with an added bonus, electric stock is quieter. According to RSSB, going electric will be an overall benefit emissions wise:

The best-performing electric trains are operated by GNER between London and Edinburgh and emit only 40g of CO2 per passenger-kilometre (g/pkm) compared with 112g/pkm for Voyagers.

By 2022, more efficient power generation will have reduced the emissions of the GNER trains to 28g/pkm. But the emissions of the Voyagers, which are only five years old and are due to remain in service until after 2030, will be unchanged. On present trends, emissions from the average car will have been reduced from 131g/pkm to 98g/pkm by 2022.

Of course, the power still has to be generated and I assuming that RSSB have taken this into account. As with all things, though there is a downside. In the event of an incident requiring the power to be isolated, the train is stranded and all air conditioning goes off, which can be uncomfortable in extremes of weather. Still, one could always dig up one of those aging diesel locomotives and rescue it…

I notice in the comments to the article that the idiot factor has managed to get a word in. Step up to the rostrum Mr Malcolm McLean, prat of the day:

Once everyone has a car, everyone needs a car. Whilst the CO2 burn per mile might not be too favourable on the train, it encourages a less mobile society.

If Mr Fuckwit McLean wants to return to the middle ages, that’s entirely his business, but I’ll be damned if I’ll take lectures on what I should or should not be encouraged to do by some halfwitted misanthropic “greenie” on a mission. Go fuck yourself.

2 Comments

  1. A few observations:

    The CO2 efficiency of a train is highly dependent on the number of people actually using it. You can have as efficient a train as you like but if there are no passengers the figures go through the roof. Reading the report gives no indication whether the figures given are theoretical maximums or based on actual observation.

    So the whole of the aviation industry only produces fractionally more CO2 than the whole of the rail industry? I did not know that.

    I wonder how much of the inefficiency of Virgin Voyagers is to do with disability and safety regulation.

Comments are closed.