Friday 24 July 2009

Irrelevant figures underlying UK transport policy

From Lord Adonis' article in The Times:

The passenger and operational benefits of electrification are immense. Electric trains are far quieter, more reliable, less polluting and cheaper to buy and maintain than diesel trains...

Rail electrification is central to the low-carbon plan set out by Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, last week. An electric train emits around a third less carbon per passenger mile than a diesel train, and less than half as much as a private car and a quarter as much as a short-haul plane.
..

Yes, at 'point of use' those figures are probably correct. But, assuming that CO2 emissions are a relevant consideration, which they are, of course, as they are a proxy for use of fossil fuels, which are scarce and expensive resources, what I want to know is what is the 'full cost' comparison?

How much CO2 is used in generating the electricity to power the trains, to smelt the steel to make the trains and rails (which have to be replaced every six years or so, I am told) and to light the stations and the car parks? Sure, aeroplanes are machines that burn fuel, but the air through which they fly is just there, unlike rails or roads. And we worked out elsewhere that in terms of CO2-per-passenger-per-mile, flying is much the same as driving a car with two passengers. And so on.

Rail is a small proportion of total transport and, therefore, of transport emissions, but its capacity to reduce overall emissions is significant if we pursue a relentless policy of both electrification and expansion, including high-speed rail... At present rail accounts for only 6.3 per cent of journeys, half the proportion of Switzerland and a fifth of that in Japan. There is no good reason why Britain should not aim for much higher proportions.

False comparison. Where rail travel really comes into its own is passenger transport in densely populated areas. Ninety per cent of the Japanese live in two massive conurbations. Switzerland is in fact six or seven large self-contained conurbations surrounding some more-or-less uninhabited mountain peaks. I wouldn't be surprised if a quarter or a third of all 'journeys' in the Greater London area are by train, for example. I was speaking to a chap just now who told me that he needed to get back from Edinburgh to London recently, the cheapest train ticket was £129 and a flight cost £12.99. Rather unsurprisingly, he took the 'plane.

14 comments:

Tim Almond said...

I did wonder that about Japan, and now you mention it about Switzerland (haven't been there in a long time) it makes sense.

His comparison about Leiden is stupid. The Dutch cycle for a pretty simple reason: the country is flat as a pancake which means cycling is easy everywhere, and so they ended up with cycle paths which make it easy to cycle.

And trains work for the Dutch for the same reason. You could draw a circle 50 miles in diameter including Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague, Eindhoven and Utrecht and get over 2/3rds of it's population.

John B said...

I was speaking to a chap just now who told me that he needed to get back from Edinburgh to London recently, the cheapest train ticket was £129 and a flight cost £12.99.

Next Tuesday daytime, the fare from Edinburgh to London on most trains is £48.05. Easyjet's cheapest is £34.99. Allowing for transport to & from the city centres, that's the same.

(I did this journey about once a month for a year, and there was almost never a difference between train and plane of more than a tenner. For some reason, people tend to compare fully-flexible train tickets with advance-booked single-flight plane tickets, which is obviously not the right comparison...)

Lola said...

I'm convinced that there is an error in the CO2 calcs used by Gummint in the fixed plant and infrastructure required for railways.

If you've ever driven along by the side of the Eurostar route through Belgium you'll know what I mean. I've done the journey regularly and I think I've only seen one HST. Mostly all the infrastructure just sits there.

Lola said...

PS. If you want to do a great recreational railway journey see this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khOUXmYK_SY

Lola said...

PPS Confession Time. I love trains.

Curmudgeon said...

John B wrote: "Next Tuesday daytime, the fare from Edinburgh to London on most trains is £48.05."

What proportion of the total is "most trains"? Is this fare available on all standard class seats on those trains? Can it be purchased on the day of travel?

Witterings from Witney said...

A nice post Mark - well made comments and a good 'spot'!

James Higham said...

£129 - I find that a staggering price, not in the context of what they charge now but just staggering by comaprison with other commodities.

Lester Taylor said...

The next time you find yourself over a railway bridge at rush hour take a good hard look both ways up the track. What you'll probably see is miles of empty track and wasted real estate.

How about we tarmac over the lot and put all the freight lorries and coaches on them? And maybe caravans too.

Mark Wadsworth said...

JB, he was talking about travel 'on the day' (or possibly the next), this was one example from me talking to one chap five minutes before I did the post, and not intended to be in any way representative.

PPS, I 'love' trains as well, I like driving a car for short journeys and recreational purposes, and I don't like flying one bit. Apart from the take-off, that's always a rush.

banned said...

"There is no good reason why Britain should not aim for much higher proportions".
Since many trains are already standing room only how do they propose to do that without building new lines ?
Used to like trains until they banned smoking, not only in them but on the open air platforms where previously you could have a smoke if the train was stoppiing for a few minutes.

Mark Wadsworth said...

Banned, to be fair, they do want to build new lines but the NIMBYs are against.

I agree on the ban on smoking on platforms on open air stations. It's petty and pathetic.

John B said...

What proportion of the total is "most trains"? Is this fare available on all standard class seats on those trains? Can it be purchased on the day of travel?

About half of them (the ones which take 4h45; the ones which take 4h15 cost slightly more). No idea, but you can buy it now. And no, but you can't get Easyjet seats for gbp35 on the day of travel either (last time I had to buy an Easyjet ticket on day-of-travel it cost over gbp100).

Mark Wadsworth said...

John B. maybe I shouldn't have included that last sentence in the post (it was an aside).

I was just pointing out that train and bus is unbeatable for urban areas (and I am a big fan)* but not so good for long distances (especially when you include the notional cost of the extra few hours sitting in the train rather than the aeroplane).

* I didn't say that the policy was fundamentally wrong, I was saying that they are basing in on entirely irrelevant and randomly selected facts and figures.