ORR new emissions data, now split by Operator

[Snow1964]

The ORR has just published new report on train emissions

For the first time, there are splits by Operator, and tables for electric and diesel trains
Also tables for freight operators emissions

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/1dzb2awz/rail-emissions-2022-23.pdf

Some highlights (or low rather than high)

Figure 2.1 Lumo is best with 7 grammes/km, TfW is 13 times worse at 92g/km
cross country with its voyager (and 170) fleet is second worse

Figure 2.3 there were 10 operators that increased diesel emissions per vehicle kilometre

Comparing table 2.2 electric vs table 2.3 diesel, shows many operators diesel trains emissions are about 4 times worse, which rather shows lack of respect about environmental issues and climate change when using diesels on electrified sections

 

[Towers]

Have to ask, in the grand scheme of things, who honestly cares?! Rail is by definition “green”, this strikes me as a waste of some annonymous civil servant’s time & wages!

 

[Dai Corner]

With one of the oldest fleets, and no electric traction at all, it's hardly surprising that TfW came in worst.

Year-on-year comparisons as their new stock is introduced will be interesting though.

 

[hwl]

Comparing table 2.2 electric vs table 2.3 diesel, shows many operators diesel trains emissions are about 4 times worse, which rather shows lack of respect about environmental issues and climate change when using diesels on electrified sections

This will rise to 7-9 times worse by the end of the decade as the average carbon intensity of grid electricity continues to reduce.

 

[Snow1964]

Table 2.4 (diesel emissions per vehicle kilometre) shows that the two worse, Avanti West Coast at 1729 and West Midlands at 1712 were significantly worse than other operators of diesel trains.

Will be interesting to see if the 805/807 and the 196s move them downwards. They need to cut by a third to get near the best, Anglia

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/1dzb2awz/rail-emissions-2022-23.pdf

Can anyone explain how GWR electric trains became 5% worse for emissions (table 2.2), does this mean something like regenerative braking is being isolated or something else.

 

[Skymonster]

Have to ask, in the grand scheme of things, who honestly cares?! Rail is by definition “green”, this strikes me as a waste of some annonymous civil servant’s time & wages!

Indeed, who cares? Rail is supposedly responsible for a mere 1.5% of UK transport emissions. Even if you believe in all the climate change claptrap, there are bigger fish to fry than rail transport.

From the report…

The decrease in electricity emissions (down 10%) exceeds the fall in electricity consumption (down 1%). This is caused by the change in the conversion factor, meaning the emissions per kilowatt of electricity is less than in the previous year. The conversion factor for diesel is unchanged…

In other words, the report has also been fudged to favour electric traction. What a surprise - NOT!

 

[richa2002]

Have to ask, in the grand scheme of things, who honestly cares?! Rail is by definition “green”, this strikes me as a waste of some annonymous civil servant’s time & wages!

Totally agree. The public sector knows no bounds in justifying its own existence.

 

[Snow1964]

In other words, the report has also been fudged to favour electric traction. What a surprise - NOT!

Not sure fudged is fair, National Grid has minute by minute data on electricity source, if it came from wind, nuclear, coal etc.

The conversion factor of carbon etc in electricity is probably fairly accurate each year based on the average of the data, just because it isn't same each year doesn't make it fudged.

The figure we don't have is the emissions difference from running diesels under the wires, that's the bit that makes rail less green than it could be.

 

[setdown]

The data that would be really useful for me (and I can't seem to find it), what is the carbon footprint of my return journey to Manchester on a Class 150, which is going an indirect route via Stockport. I can then compare that to a direct journey in my fairly recent petrol car, and make an informed decision about what to choose.

Is that kind of per-fleet data available?

 

[Gaelan]

The data that would be really useful for me (and I can't seem to find it), what is the carbon footprint of my return journey to Manchester on a Class 150, which is going an indirect route via Stockport. I can then compare that to a direct journey in my fairly recent petrol car, and make an informed decision about what to choose.

Is that kind of per-fleet data available?

It's worth noting, of course, that - unless those 150s are loaded to the point Northern is considering additional service - the 150 is going to have the same emissions whether you're on it or not.

 

[skyhigh]

It's worth noting, of course, that - unless those 150s are loaded to the point Northern is considering additional service - the 150 is going to have the same emissions whether you're on it or not.

This, 100%. And then if you take the car you need to consider additional pollutants such as tyre particulates.

 

[Trainbike46]

Indeed, who cares? Rail is supposedly responsible for a mere 1.5% of UK transport emissions. Even if you believe in all the climate change claptrap, there are bigger fish to fry than rail transport.

From the report…

In other words, the report has also been fudged to favour electric traction. What a surprise - NOT!

That is not a fudge; Electricity production has become greener (lower emissions per kWh on average), so the same amount of electricity used produces less emissions

Not sure fudged is fair, National Grid has minute by minute data on electricity source, if it came from wind, nuclear, coal etc.

The conversion factor of carbon etc in electricity is probably fairly accurate each year based on the average of the data, just because it isn't same each year doesn't make it fudged.

The figure we don't have is the emissions difference from running diesels under the wires, that's the bit that makes rail less green than it could be.

exactly; it is just accurate reporting of what is happening

The data that would be really useful for me (and I can't seem to find it), what is the carbon footprint of my return journey to Manchester on a Class 150, which is going an indirect route via Stockport. I can then compare that to a direct journey in my fairly recent petrol car, and make an informed decision about what to choose.

Is that kind of per-fleet data available?

I don't think per fleet data is available, but you could approximate it by calculating the on-rail distance using something like railmiles and then multiplying it by northern's average emissions per passenger-km

The ORR has just published new report on train emissions

For the first time, there are splits by Operator, and tables for electric and diesel trains
Also tables for freight operators emissions

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/1dzb2awz/rail-emissions-2022-23.pdf

Some highlights (or low rather than high)

Figure 2.1 Lumo is best with 7 grammes/km, TfW is 13 times worse at 92g/km
cross country with its voyager (and 170) fleet is second worse

Figure 2.3 there were 10 operators that increased diesel emissions per vehicle kilometre

Comparing table 2.2 electric vs table 2.3 diesel, shows many operators diesel trains emissions are about 4 times worse, which rather shows lack of respect about environmental issues and climate change when using diesels on electrified section

It's super interesting data - thank you for sharing it here (I'd have missed it otherwise!)

It does make rather clear how much emissions would reduce with more electrification - and it would bring other benefits as well (including better electrification, on average a more reliable railway, in some cases more capacity, etc.)

I'm happy to see they decided to put the railway's emissions in context of wider transport emissions - though I am surprised it doesn't include aviation there

Does anyone know if Eurostar's emissions are based on miles just in the UK, on the full routes of trains that enter the uk, or on all of their routes including the ones not to/from London?

 

[Towers]

The data that would be really useful for me (and I can't seem to find it), what is the carbon footprint of my return journey to Manchester on a Class 150, which is going an indirect route via Stockport. I can then compare that to a direct journey in my fairly recent petrol car, and make an informed decision about what to choose.

Is that kind of per-fleet data available?

Just do what is most convenient and financially beneficial - the difference is hardly worth worrying about, surely?

You can’t change whether your rail journey is undertaken on a zero emisson electric train or a 40 year old DMU, the power for a zero emission electric train isn’t zero emission anyway, plus there are wider societal factors such as traffic congestion (even if you had an EV), plus miniscule emissions from your brakes and tyres to think about - that degree of microscopic-level personal responsibility for each and every journey just doesn’t work, for a variety of reasons. Using rail is widely considered to be “green” and to deliver environmental and societal benefits over your car, just leave it at that and choose accordingly!

 

[Horizon22]

It's worth noting, of course, that - unless those 150s are loaded to the point Northern is considering additional service - the 150 is going to have the same emissions whether you're on it or not.

Although the same argument can be used for planes/flights so that argument can only go so far; if each individual makes the decision that their input makes no difference, then collectively yes, there will be no difference.

 

[ar10642]

It's worth noting, of course, that - unless those 150s are loaded to the point Northern is considering additional service - the 150 is going to have the same emissions whether you're on it or not.

Indeed, this is why I don't really believe in this idea of a "personal carbon footprint", it only really matters if the country (or indeed the world) reduces its emissions overall.

Although the same argument can be used for planes/flights so that argument can only go so far; if each individual makes the decision that their input makes no difference, then collectively yes, there will be no difference.

If you're going to make that argument, should people be choosing an electric car over an old polluting 150 so we can discontinue the train service altogether?

 

[deltic]

Have to ask, in the grand scheme of things, who honestly cares?! Rail is by definition “green”, this strikes me as a waste of some annonymous civil servant’s time & wages!

Because when road passenger transport is decarbonised - rail will no longer by any definition be green.

 

[HSTEd]

Given that modern non-hybrid hatchbacks are closing in on 110g/km these days, this probably does not bode well for the railway's environmental credentials.

 

[deltic]

If you're going to make that argument, should people be choosing an electric car over an old polluting 150 so we can discontinue the train service altogether?

Yes - and that is the risk for the rail sector in the future

 

[Horizon22]

If you're going to make that argument, should people be choosing an electric car over an old polluting 150 so we can discontinue the train service altogether?

The argument is that if everyone thought "well the train will run anyway" when they had the option, you'd not have 1 but say 20 extra cars on the road. This is all hypothetical, but individual actions do of course add up.

Electric cars still don't solve things like congestion in cities and towns.

 

[stuu]

Figure 2.1 Lumo is best with 7 grammes/km, TfW is 13 times worse at 92g/km
cross country with its voyager (and 170) fleet is second worse

I'm a bit puzzled why Lumo is so much lower than the Elizabeth Line (17g/km) - you would assume that there are more passengers per car on the average EL train, and slower trains will use less energy

 

[Horizon22]

I'm a bit puzzled why Lumo is so much lower than the Elizabeth Line (17g/km) - you would assume that there are more passengers per car on the average EL train, and slower trains will use less energy

Lumo has a smaller fleet, maybe. And I'm going to presume stop-start-stop operations uses more energy as well? Much like urban car use is generally less fuel efficient than motorway travelling.

 

[Trainbike46]

Because when road passenger transport is decarbonised - rail will no longer by any definition be green.

Rail is much more energy efficient - an electric train easily beats an electric car on emissions (though both are clearly masses better than fossil fuel cars)

 

[lachlan]

Although the same argument can be used for planes/flights so that argument can only go so far; if each individual makes the decision that their input makes no difference, then collectively yes, there will be no difference.

Aviation is fully privatised and flexible to demand - flights will quickly be dropped if not profitable whereas many rail services are run at a loss to provide an essential public service.

Indeed, this is why I don't really believe in this idea of a "personal carbon footprint", it only really matters if the country (or indeed the world) reduces its emissions overall.



If you're going to make that argument, should people be choosing an electric car over an old polluting 150 so we can discontinue the train service altogether?

The train service will always need to run to provide transport for people who can't drive. And to make public transport viable they need to run at sufficient frequencies that rail is convenient to use.

 

[Trainbike46]

Yes - and that is the risk for the rail sector in the future

Clearly, we need more pace on decarbonising the remaining diesel trains - to make rail more attractive so it can replace cars and planes, to reduce rail's emissions and to safeguard the future of rail

 

[eldomtom2]

Have to ask, in the grand scheme of things, who honestly cares?! Rail is by definition “green”, this strikes me as a waste of some annonymous civil servant’s time & wages!

How can you know that "Rail is by definition green" if you don't measure its environmental impacts?

Given that modern non-hybrid hatchbacks are closing in on 110g/km these days, this probably does not bode well for the railway's environmental credentials.

Remember - the report's measuring vehicle km, not passenger km.

 

[ar10642]

Clearly, we need more pace on decarbonising the remaining diesel trains - to make rail more attractive so it can replace cars and planes, to reduce rail's emissions and to safeguard the future of rail

Yes, that's what I actually want. Especially since we have proven technology that can do it and has been around for decades.

 

[Snow1964]

I'm a bit puzzled why Lumo is so much lower than the Elizabeth Line (17g/km) - you would assume that there are more passengers per car on the average EL train, and slower trains will use less energy

A lot of off peak, early morning, and late evening Elizabeth line trains are fairly empty at the extremities of the line, so electricity use per passenger is going to much higher.

 

[lachlan]

How can you know that "Rail is by definition green" if you don't measure its environmental impacts?

Because it runs anyway, so any car journey made is in addition to whatever impact rail has.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

How can you know that "Rail is by definition green" if you don't measure its environmental impacts?

Remember - the report's measuring vehicle km, not passenger km.

That's the problem with the figures, an electric train with no passengers on worse for the environment than a full aircraft. In reality of course a train full of passengers be it diesel or electric is far better than 600 cars on the road. The worst for emissions are of course taxis as for every journey they are double the private car by the nature they run empty to come and get you and then empty back after they drop you off.

Electric cars will never be practical in comparison with trains as far as people movers are concerned but it all boils down to horses for courses and getting the correct journey on the correct method.

I'm really not convinced the industry needs to be focused on carbon emissions as others have said, the best thing they can do is get passengers on the services and it's a win for everyone

 

[slowroad]

Because it runs anyway, so any car journey made is in addition to whatever impact rail has.

Same applies to plane - they run anyway too.