Pollution on UK newest trains

[74A]

Pollution on some new UK trains is 13 times one of London’s busiest roads

Nitrogen dioxide levels far exceed average recorded on traffic-clogged Marylebone Road, according to a study

Full story in the Guardian

Pollution on some new UK trains ‘13 times one of London’s busiest roads’

Nitrogen dioxide levels far exceed average recorded on traffic-clogged Marylebone Road, according to a study

www.theguardian.com

Can see the front coach getting much busier in the future ! I find the air filters on the 800 very poor. Outside fumes from things like wood fires gets in the passenger saloon. Something I never used to notice in an HST.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Yes I saw this on twitter. To the twitter I added a reference from my professional publication Chemistry World published by the Royal Society of Chemistry. The article is almost as equally damning.

Air on board diesel trains is five times worse than beside a busy street

Ultrafine particles and soot linked to lung cancer are massively elevated in carriages pulled by diesel engines

www.chemistryworld.com

Air on board diesel trains is five times worse than beside a busy street BY ANTHONY KING4 APRIL 2019

Ultrafine particles and soot linked to lung cancer are massively elevated in carriages pulled by diesel engines

Travelling on a diesel train can expose you to far higher levels of harmful particulates than standing beside a busy road, a Danish study has found. Diesel exhaust is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer, as well as other lung and cardiovascular diseases. Those sitting on carriages being pulled by a diesel engine, especially close to the engine, breathe in a much larger dose of diesel fumes.

.

As a FRSC - I can post more of the article if anyone is interested.

The twitter feed also stated "There is a one word solution- ELECTRIFICATION"

 

[Nova1]

Hmm, if only we had some way of powering trains that didn’t involve diesel…

 

[yorksrob]

Agree with a drive towards electrification.

That said, smoking (for example) is still far more likely to result in lung cancer than diesel travel.

 

[Horizon22]

I wonder if this will be picked up by unions as a potential issue regarding safety? There are quite a few disclaimers saying that it remains within safe limits. One of the data is an average, and the other seems to be the highest on the journey. Also does anyone know if the source report is public?

Also the answer to this is very simply, electrification:

Rail minister Chris Heaton-Harris said: “The safety of staff and passengers is our absolute priority. While these findings are within limits, I do not believe people should have to accept anything less than the highest levels of air quality.

“I have asked the industry to immediately conduct further research and explore all engineering modifications and options to rapidly improve air quality on trains and in stations.

He added: “If required, we will not hesitate to strengthen legislation to ensure the highest standards of air quality are met and maintained.”

 

[irish_rail]

Agree with a drive towards electrification.

That said, smoking (for example) is still far more likely to result in lung cancer than diesel travel.

True but why risk it? There will be plenty of people who are not going to want to increase their cancer risk (even by a little) and will opt not to use the train.

 

[yorksrob]

True but why risk it? There will be plenty of people who are not going to want to increase their cancer risk (even by a little) and will opt not to use the train.

Indeed, which is yet another reason why electrification is so important.

That said, for myself, I'd happily have done with it and sit in a 205 thumper at speed with all the droplights down.

 

[jfollows]

The Guardian report says

Passengers travelling onboard a Great Western Railway carriage running from London to Bristol, procured by the government as part of a £5.7bn scheme, were subject to huge spikes in nitrogen dioxide (NO2) pollution when it switched to diesel from electric.

which I find far too vague - does the GWR train subject its passengers to a spike only when swtching from diesel to electric?[EDIT I mis-read the article here, it's the other way round, which makes more sense] For a start, that seems like the wrong way round. In any case, if you subject me to the equivalent of the Marylebone Road only once during my journey from Bristol (say), then that's no big deal, especially if I walk along the Marylebone Road once I arrive in Paddington.

I find the article too sensational and devoid of facts.

I don't disagree that electrification is the solution, but the article reads like scaremongering to me, and misinterpretation. What's the real risk from NO2 when on a train like this? Is it comparable to the regular scares about eating bacon, for example, which are constantly misinterpreting the facts?

If, on the other hand, the diesel train journey is akin to being next to a main road for the duration of its journey, then this is significant, but - reading through the journalism - I'm not convinced this is what the RSSB report is saying. However I couldn't find a copy of the RSSB report itself so that I could read it for myself - does anyone know if it's available anywhere?

 

[DanNCL]

First the cracks and now this. How many more major issues are we going to find with this family of trains before something is done to sort them out?

The more I read about and travel on these the more I’m convinced that there’s little that can be done for this fleet of lemons. They are an embarrassment to the UK rail industry.

 

[Horizon22]

The Guardian report says

which I find far too vague - does the GWR train subject its passengers to a spike only when swtching from diesel to electric? For a start, that seems like the wrong way round. In any case, if you subject me to the equivalent of the Marylebone Road only once during my journey from Bristol (say), then that's no big deal, especially if I walk along the Marylebone Road once I arrive in Paddington.

At the same point it also says in the data: "Average levels of nitrogen dioxide were highest onboard GWR trains between London and Bristol" which is confusing; is it "spikes" or averages?

 

[Grumpy Git]

Joking aside, they should have compared it not to Marylebone Rd, but to standing on P12 at New St when a Voyager is ticking over in P11.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

So the 221 is the highest source of particulate emissions on the few Euston-Birmingham services they operate, but the 222s on London-Nottingham produce less than half as much?
It there any material difference between those models, emissions-wise?
And it's Alstom's fault, since the takeover of Bombardier!
An XC (22x-dominated) example would have been useful to compare, also with 180 and 185 services using the same engines.
If nothing else, diesels-under-the-wires, or idling in stations, will be under the cosh from now on.

PS I see from the Railway Gazette article that the London-Nottingham train studied was a class 43 (HST), not the more common 222.
On-train air quality standards to be reviewed following RSSB research | Rail Business UK | Railway Gazette International

It found four main sources of particles: the exhaust, passenger movement, brakes or dust from the hard floors, and particles coming in from outside. The highest levels of particles were found between London Euston and Birmingham New Street on Class 221 trains, being significantly higher than levels routinely measured at busy urban roadside locations.
The highest levels of NO2 were found between London Paddington and Bristol Temple Meads on board a Class 800 bi-mode train in diesel mode. These were also significantly higher than routinely measured at busy urban roadsides. There was a large difference in NO2 when comparing diesel mode to electric mode on the Class 800 and Class 755 bi-modes.

 

[tiptoptaff]

First the cracks and now this. How many more major issues are we going to find with this family of trains before something is done to sort them out?

The more I read about and travel on these the more I’m convinced that there’s little that can be done for this fleet of lemons. They are an embarrassment to the UK rail industry.

They really aren't.

They're nowhere near as bad as the rose tinted spectale brigade like to think

 

[LeeLivery]

The 222 I was on to Nottingham absolutely reeked of diesel recently. Not had that before, but it wasn't nice for the greener form of transport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fairly damning (again) of Vivarail given that much older 15x don't appear and run through tunnels etc, none of which exist on the Marston Vale.

Very much emphasises why opening East West Rail without wires from day one is a stupid piece of cost cutting.

 

[seagull]

I suppose at least the scaremongering has moved on from Covid.

And when diesel is gone they'll move onto the dangerous electro-magnetic field and extreme low frequency emissions caused by being sat under 25Kv of overhead electrification, no doubt.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wonder what the comparison for a diesel car or bus on a motorway (or the A421 in the Marston Vale's case) would be? There is no excuse for the railway to be worse - is it?

 

[DanNCL]

They really aren't.

They're nowhere near as bad as the rose tinted spectale brigade like to think

I'm not part of any "rose tinted spectacle brigade", I'm certainly not of the mindset of nothing can be better than the HSTs, if anything I'm one of those who was saying they needed replacing long before they actually were replaced. But these Hitachi units have been nothing but an embarrasment. Near universally hated by passengers, plagued with faults, developing cracks after only a few years use, and now this over the air quality. And do you remember the humiliating first trip for these units back in 2017? Granted no train settles down into service issue free, but these have been particularly bad.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

One other issue with the report is that it seems to be comparing the level of NOx/particulates inside a train with the level outside on a main road. If you want to compare safety to the passenger of different modes of transport, then I would have thought the correct comparison would be inside a train vs. inside a car (or bus, etc.)

 

[Horizon22]

I'm not part of any "rose tinted spectacle brigade", I'm certainly not of the mindset of nothing can be better than the HSTs, if anything I'm one of those who was saying they needed replacing long before they actually were replaced. But these Hitachi units have been nothing but an embarrasment. Near universally hated by passengers, plagued with faults, developing cracks after only a few years use, and now this over the air quality. And do you remember the humiliating first trip for these units back in 2017? Granted no train settles down into service issue free, but these have been particularly bad.

"Near universal" is rather subjective. There are many elements that are big improvements objectively, some things divide opinion and, yes, some of the technical and build quality aspects are rather poor.

 

[D6975]

The Guardian report says

which I find far too vague - does the GWR train subject its passengers to a spike only when swtching from diesel to electric? For a start, that seems like the wrong way round.

Read it again!
It doesn't say 'when switching from diesel to electric'.
It says 'when switching to diesel from electric'.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I'm not part of any "rose tinted spectacle brigade", I'm certainly not of the mindset of nothing can be better than the HSTs, if anything I'm one of those who was saying they needed replacing long before they actually were replaced. But these Hitachi units have been nothing but an embarrasment. Near universally hated by passengers, plagued with faults, developing cracks after only a few years use, and now this over the air quality. And do you remember the humiliating first trip for these units back in 2017? Granted no train settles down into service issue free, but these have been particularly bad.

You’re categorically wrong about passenger opinion, the polls of travelling public has shown the exact reverse. There’s a distinct minority who are very vocal about specific complaints (such as seats) and it’s easy to form an opinion based on that if you’re inside the echo chamber. Outside in the real world, customers prefer them to HSTs on average.

 

[jfollows]

Read it again!
It doesn't say 'when switching from diesel to electric'.
It says 'when switching to diesel from electric'.

Thank you - you're right. OK, so that at least makes more sense to me now!

 

[O L Leigh]

I wonder what the comparison for a diesel car or bus on a motorway (or the A421 in the Marston Vale's case) would be? There is no excuse for the railway to be worse - is it?

A few years ago a consumer programme ran a (fairly unscientific) test to compare exposure to pollution over a fixed commuting route. If I remember it correctly, four participants wore air quality monitoring devices of some sort and covered the same route; one on foot, one cycling, one on the bus and one in a car. Place your bets now against which participant you think was exposed to the greatest level of diesel pollution.

I have always wondered why it is that train designers put the A/C plant on the roof near to the engine exhausts. I’m sure there are sound reasons why they need to be up there, but it does mean that you get these sorts of consequences. It’s like putting the bathing area next to the sewage outfall.

 

[stj]

Bring back the old DMUS and Steam Trains then they would be moaning!

 

[O L Leigh]

I think I would like to see the original research on this, though. Relying on a media outlet's interpretation is not likely to give the full facts. For example, comparing the highest readings in the train to the average readings on Marylebone Road without further explanation is a little misleading. There are times when Marylebone Road is choked (and sometimes choking), but an average means that they are also taking into account all those times when it’s much quieter. It’s also misleading when they more or less hide the crucial point which is that the levels remained within safe limits.

I take the point that you would generally expect newer to mean better, but that doesn’t necessarily mean anything if it’s something that the designers clearly hadn’t considered. But then equally, could this just be another new train teething issue. I wonder if there might be a simple fix, such as an aerodynamic piece to deflect the diesel exhaust away from the A/C.

I certainly don’t think that articles such as this which don't cite the research correctly or link to it (at least, I couldn’t see any link) are helpful. If people are seriously concerned about air quality issues and are going to make decisions about travel based on it, they need to be given access to the facts rather than the media’s interpretation of them so that their decisions can be sound.

 

[DanNCL]

"Near universal" is rather subjective. There are many elements that are big improvements objectively, some things divide opinion and, yes, some of the technical and build quality aspects are rather poor.

You’re categorically wrong about passenger opinion, the polls of travelling public has shown the exact reverse. There’s a distinct minority who are very vocal about specific complaints (such as seats) and it’s easy to form an opinion based on that if you’re inside the echo chamber. Outside in the real world, customers prefer them to HSTs on average.

Of course the polls say that, the questions will be worded as such that those running the polls get the answers they want. When you listen to what people actually have to say onboard the trains rather than reading biased surveys, it becomes very apparent that a significant number, not just a vocal minority, are not happy with them. Outside in the real world, where you aren't shot down for daring to criticise the rail industry, a much larger number of people are incredibly unhappy with these trains than happy with them.

 

[Horizon22]

Of course the polls say that, the questions will be worded as such that those running the polls get the answers they want. When you listen to what people actually have to say onboard the trains rather than reading biased surveys, it becomes very apparent that a significant number, not just a vocal minority, are not happy with them. Outside in the real world, where you aren't shot down for daring to criticise the rail industry, a much larger number of people are incredibly unhappy with these trains than happy with them.

Only there actually aren't and you've offered no objective data and when you are presented with some (and likely the only data) that isn't just hearsay, you have just shot it down immediately. Agreed there is some discontent, but you've decided to call everything "biased". Many new users - some of who I know personally if we want to talk subjectively - and even older users who I have spoken to too are happy with them, but of course there are some aspects they'd like to see improved (normally seats).

 

[Revaulx]

You’re categorically wrong about passenger opinion, the polls of travelling public has shown the exact reverse. There’s a distinct minority who are very vocal about specific complaints (such as seats) and it’s easy to form an opinion based on that if you’re inside the echo chamber. Outside in the real world, customers prefer them to HSTs on average.

The majority of my experience of them is the all-electric LNER ones, which are replacing the all-electric 91/Mark 4 sets. The seats aren’t great and the harsh lighting is nasty. Other than that, they’re a big improvement over their predecessors, which have always felt excessively value engineered.

The HST replacements are an overall improvement as well, but given that the trains they are replacing were designed and built 40+ years ago, the level of improvement is pretty underwhelming.

It seems that the lessons learned from inadequate testing of prototypes in the Modernisation Plan era have all been forgotten.

 

[DanNCL]

Only there actually aren't and you've offered no objective data and when you are presented with some (and likely the only data) that isn't just hearsay, you have just shot it down immediately. Agreed there is some discontent, but you've decided to call everything "biased". Many new users - some of who I know personally if we want to talk subjectively - and even older users who I have spoken to too are happy with them, but of course there are some aspects they'd like to see improved (normally seats).

There is no reliable “data” for either argument, indeed it is only hearsay but that applies for both arguments not just the arguments against these units. The polls referred to can be ignored on the basis that they are heavily biased to give the answer those running the poll want. If I were to do two polls on these units, one with the questions worded to encourage positive responses and the other to encourage negative responses, the responses would come back mostly as encouraged by the wording of the questions.

I travel on these trains regularly, and on almost every journey I overhear other passengers, likely non enthusiasts, complain about them both amongst themselves and to staff. On the other hand I can count on one hand the number of positives I’ve overheard passengers saying about them.