Government publishes world’s first ‘greenprint’ to decarbonise all modes of domestic transport by 2050

[Randomer]

I'll believe it when a confirmed rolling plan of electrification actually is commenced. We would need to electrify at a rate faster than we ever have before to meet the 2050 target and doing all of the lines outlined in the Network Rail TDNS, something like 2-3x more electrification than we have ever done year on year before. The rail natter episode is a very good primer on the scale of works needed, I certainly hadn't seen quite how much it was.

Anecdotally it would also need to be a faster rate of electrification than anyone in Europe has ever managed at any point in history.

I'm all for the infill schemes, particularly to reduce freight running under the wires on diesel but its a tiny amount of the work that will be required. Effectively we are looking at HS2 scale investment at a time when HS2 spending is already ramping up (note I support HS2 and I do not believe that this is a reason to cancel or de-scope it.)

Forgive me if I am doubtful it will occur.

A cynic would also note that the 2040 ambition is not to "remove all diesel trains" (i.e. no use of diesel for traction) but "to remove all diesel only trains". So all the Bi-Mode units can happily run 10% of there journeys on electric and switch to diesel for the rest and meet the commitment....

 

[WAO]

But we do have electrification re-starting, with fitting several jigsaw pieces of TP (for the bi-modes) with the aim of full wiring when Standedge is solved, the expensive Braybrooke GSP work commencing and the tendering starting for the MML completion.

I'd be happier if DFT had signed off Lostock - Wigan, stuck on a desk, agreed to fix masts to the piles North of Didcot and approved progress to Bristol.

WAO

 

[Mikey C]

It'll be fascinating what order lines are electrified in. You imagine that finishing the MML will be the first "new" project

 

[hwl]

It'll be fascinating what order lines are electrified in. You imagine that finishing the MML will be the first "new" project

I'd bet on others finishing first.

 

[Yindee8191]

I suspect wires to Bristol proper aren’t too far away - the remodelling of Bristol East Junction is now underway and due to be finished by September, removing a fairly large obstacle from the project.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Germany has a trial section

View attachment 99658

We will have really lost the plot if they propose to go down that road.

Where they going to land the air ambulance when people have a crash?

 

[The Ham]

Where they going to land the air ambulance when people have a crash?

I would also question how much it would cost compared to the electrification of the same length of the railway network and it's likely to only benefit lorries which would need to see a drop by a factor of 10 in the traction emissions to get even close to current rail freight carbon emissions (with rail also having lower maintenance carbon emissions than the Strategic Road Network and this would likely increase those for the roads even more).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It'll be fascinating what order lines are electrified in. You imagine that finishing the MML will be the first "new" project

The trouble is, it is not just the wiring.
Every route will have its track, signalling and other infrastructure issues that Network Rail will need to attend to before the wires go up.
That's what extends projects from a couple of years to 5 years and more, especially if they have to go through the TWA process.
The cancelled GW routes to Bristol and Oxford might come back first, as a lot of preparatory work has been done (though they might have to redesign the OHLE system to reduce costs).
I'm not sure how far the MML design got before cancellation, and I think a major remodelling project was planned at Leicester (Wigston-Syston).
You've also got the problem that both GWR and EMR are/will be fully equipped with bi-modes.
Do you re-equip with EMUs after electrification and if so where do you cascade the bi-modes to?
It all affects the business case and rolling stock policy of all the lines involved.

 

[Mikey C]

The trouble is, it is not just the wiring.
Every route will have its track, signalling and other infrastructure issues that Network Rail will need to attend to before the wires go up.
That's what extends projects from a couple of years to 5 years and more, especially if they have to go through the TWA process.
The cancelled GW routes to Bristol and Oxford might come back first, as a lot of preparatory work has been done (though they might have to redesign the OHLE system to reduce costs).
I'm not sure how far the MML design got before cancellation, and I think a major remodelling project was planned at Leicester (Wigston-Syston).
You've also got the problem that both GWR and EMR are/will be fully equipped with bi-modes.
Do you re-equip with EMUs after electrification and if so where do you cascade the bi-modes to?
It all affects the business case and rolling stock policy of all the lines involved.

I wasn't so much talking about when the wiring would be finished, but when the project would be announced and started, and clearly behind the scenes NR have already started talking to the industry about the rest of the MML project

I'd almost count Bristol and Oxford as hangovers from the previous electrification programme. They were never Graylinged, like the rest of the MML, but paused

 

[Western Lord]

The trouble is, it is not just the wiring.
Every route will have its track, signalling and other infrastructure issues that Network Rail will need to attend to before the wires go up.
That's what extends projects from a couple of years to 5 years and more, especially if they have to go through the TWA process.
The cancelled GW routes to Bristol and Oxford might come back first, as a lot of preparatory work has been done (though they might have to redesign the OHLE system to reduce costs).
I'm not sure how far the MML design got before cancellation, and I think a major remodelling project was planned at Leicester (Wigston-Syston).
You've also got the problem that both GWR and EMR are/will be fully equipped with bi-modes.
Do you re-equip with EMUs after electrification and if so where do you cascade the bi-modes to?
It all affects the business case and rolling stock policy of all the lines involved.

Surely the idea was that the bi-modes would be converted to EMUs by removing all the diesel kit, presumably leaving one engine per unit as a emergency reserve. However, by the time all routes that they use are electrified they will probably be life expired.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The rail-environment-policy-statement.pdf is here and has positive statements like

We will electrify more of the network to enable electric rail freight to run on more routes. We will also work with the rail freight industry to ensure that the existing electric network can be better used. Short “infill” electrification projects could quickly deliver benefits and enable rail freight operators to immediately switch services over to electric traction. We will pursue such electrification to maximise the benefits gained from rail freight. By filling in electrification gaps to key ports and terminals, we can open new opportunities for electric, cleaner, greener, rail freight journeys. As freight electrification is rolled out further, additional electric locomotives will be required to supplement those already available

Then on page 11 there is a very positive policy statement on electrification

We recognise the challenges faced by some previous electrification schemes. Our aspiration is to achieve a stable, ongoing rail electrification programme that learns from past mistakes. To decarbonise the railway, electrification must be more efficient than ever before. Work conducted by Network Rail and the Railway Industry Association to identify lessons from past schemes provides a solid foundation but the challenge will be to deliver efficiently in practice. To achieve this, Great British Railways will lead an efficient electrification programme, working with funders and suppliers to minimise the cost and disruption of further electrification. The affordability and value for money of each electrification scheme will be assessed to ensure rail decarbonisation is achieved as efficiently as possible.

and this interesting statement on third rail

DfT, Network Rail, Office for Rail and Road (ORR), and RSSB are working together to explore options for safer versions of third rail electrification.

There are other sections on other environmental areas but this is a positive policy statement how that now translate into specific projects isn't included but the message is electrification is back on the table if NR can make it efficient enough.

 

[The exile]

I'd almost count Bristol and Oxford as hangovers from the previous electrification programme. They were never Graylinged, like the rest of the MML, but paused

In both cases - given the availability of bi-modes, the pause (assuming it is just that) until after the ongoing (Bristol East) or planned (Oxford) major works is actually quite sensible.

 

[59CosG95]

The rail-environment-policy-statement.pdf is here and has positive statements like


Then on page 11 there is a very positive policy statement on electrification



and this interesting statement on third rail

There are other sections on other environmental areas but this is a positive policy statement how that now translate into specific projects isn't included but the message is electrification is back on the table if NR can make it efficient enough.

Perhaps NR should look to some Eastern wisdom...India & China are very efficient at delivering projects of this nature.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Surely the idea was that the bi-modes would be converted to EMUs by removing all the diesel kit, presumably leaving one engine per unit as a emergency reserve. However, by the time all routes that they use are electrified they will probably be life expired.

This is going off-topic, but I can't think of anything more pointless than having scores of redundant MTU diesel power packs (on 27-year leases) lying around the network...
You'd surely buy new EMUs and cascade the bi-modes onwards to diesel TOCs (leaving some for running services off the wires).
We'll have to see what GBR makes of the situation, if and when it comes.

 

[TrainTrackJack]

Interesting to see the Worcester Hereford line proposed for electrification.... but the Snow Hill Lines as Hydrogen!

 

[coppercapped]

Where they going to land the air ambulance when people have a crash?

There are two trial sections each about 10-15km long - one is near Lübeck on the A1 Autobahn towards Hamburg and I can't remember where the other one is.

The key is 'trial sections'. There were built to gain information about the practicality and costs of such a scheme and I suspect that the issues of where to land the air ambulances will be part of the debriefing. If you don't know German autobahnen then I would point out that, unlike those in the UK, there are parking or rest areas every few kilometres apart from the more widely spaced service stations. Some at least of these rest areas could take helicopters and, out in the country, the fields near the road could be used. In many areas the autobahnen, like the classic railways, are not fenced so gaining access is easy.

I would also question how much it would cost compared to the electrification of the same length of the railway network and it's likely to only benefit lorries which would need to see a drop by a factor of 10 in the traction emissions to get even close to current rail freight carbon emissions (with rail also having lower maintenance carbon emissions than the Strategic Road Network and this would likely increase those for the roads even more).

The trial stretch near Lübeck, which I have driven past many times, is based on tramway equipment. The maximum speed of HGVs using it will be 90kph, the limit for large trucks so high speed railway type equipment is not needed.

The whole point of the electrification is that it is only for lorries. Lorry traffic in Germany is very dense not only because of the size of its own industrial sector but also because it is a transit land, it shares borders with nine other countries: Denmark, Poland, the Czech Republic, Austria, Switzerland, France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Autobahn nearside lanes are often fully occupied with nose to tail trucks. If at least the use of some of the diesel used for the autobahn sections could be avoided it would make a significant difference to locally emitted exhaust fumes. This is especially true in densely populated areas, such as Nord-Rhein Westfalen.

At the moment the concept is that the HGVs will use electric power while on the motorways and revert to diesel when they leave - just before the slip road the diesel will be started, the pans dropped and the truck reverts to standard.

One incidental advantage of an electric lorry is that it will put an end to the 'elephant races' when a 40 tonne truck running at 90kph tries to overtake another 40 tonne truck running at 89kph. On two lane autobahnen this produces tail-backs which can be kilometres long.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The whole point of the electrification is that it is only for lorries. Lorry traffic in Germany is very dense not only because of the size of its own industrial sector but also because it is a transit land, it shares borders with nine other countries: Denmark, Poland, the Czech Republic, Austria, Switzerland, France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Autobahn nearside lanes are often fully occupied with nose to tail trucks. If at least the use of some of the diesel used for the autobahn sections could be avoided it would make a significant difference to locally emitted exhaust fumes. This is especially true in densely populated areas, such as Nord-Rhein Westfalen.

A serious approach to decarbonisation by the EU would be to have rolling highways across all EU countries like Switzerland have put in place so the long distance element is low carbon electric rail haulage. This would be far and away quickest way to reduce diesel emissions and should Hydrogen or some other duck weed solution come to the fore then reassess.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Maybe but twin pantographs is a recipe for dewirements let alone all the infrastructure required to support it. We need a policy that electrifys freight lines first and shifts long distance road haulage off the roads unless its fuelled by zero emissions propulsion. Yes it will cost more but thats the price to reduce our impact on the climate.

I disagree. We need a policy that electrifies routes based on reducing the largest number of diesel trains as soon as possible, irrespective of freight or passengers or both. There is at least a freight each way every hour in the Cherwell valley (Oxford-Banbury-Leamington) hauled by 66 or sometimes 70. On top of that there are 2 XCs each way per hour, as well as Turbos etc.

That combined traffic needs to be presented collectively to prove the viability of electrification. Similarly Water Orton in the West Midlands has 12 XC trains per hour 6 each but there also many freights - proved by Water Orton being a "hotspot" for wagon spotters. The problem is that the XC rolling stock is all diesel as is the Chiltern and GWR Turbo fleet. So passenger operators would need to procure electric or Bimode fleets and FOCs would also need to acquire / reinstate or reresource electric traction.

 

[reddragon]

It always frustrates me when documents talk of future technology and distant plans.

Much of Europe already has electrified rail networks and China has nearly 500,000 electric buses, but here they are the future once developed.

We already have the tech to deliver 90% of transport electrification, today, now and not "in the undefined future"

Much of our diesel train passenger fleet can already be switched to battery / OLE hybrids with charging points and a lot of freight just needs some infill electrification. Cheap LFP batteries from CATL in China already enable this. We just need to invest properly and not again making the mistake of building Steam Locos even after it was clear they wouldn't even make their first boiler overhaul!

I have driven an EV for over 5 years and it drives me insane when people say its the future but somehow not now! My house is CO2 free on energy and costs nowt to run, but apparently that is some future aspiration.

Come on, just get on with switching!

 

[option]

Interesting to see the Worcester Hereford line proposed for electrification.... but the Snow Hill Lines as Hydrogen!

eh???

 

[TrainTrackJack]

eh???

My bad. the SHL are for electrification, with 'Alternative'. Look at page 78 on this.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1002285/decarbonising-transport-a-better-greener-britain.pdf

 

[Ken H]

Unless the plan includes a rolling plan of electrification, it won't amount to a hill of beans for rhe railway.

And that will depend on where the electric comes from. Still huge amounts of fossil fuels in the base load generation. 34% currently gas turbine.

 

[Chester1]

Perhaps NR should look to some Eastern wisdom...India & China are very efficient at delivering projects of this nature.

I really wouldn't recommend Indian approach to rail safety! Its genuinely gobsmacking when u see it in person. People hanging off side of trains my be a steorotype but one based on reality (perhaps less frequent now). I am guessing the infrastructure works take the same jeopardy friendly approach as operational side.

Good intentions from the government are nice but if the cost isn't brought down to a sensible level it won't matter much.

Heavy rail purists may hate it but the most reliable to decarbonisation approach in my local area (Greater Manchester) is light rail conversion. TfGM has a much better delivery record than NR!

 

[reddragon]

And that will depend on where the electric comes from. Still huge amounts of fossil fuels in the base load generation. 34% currently gas turbine.

34% fossil fuels is somewhat better than a diesel train which is very inefficient!

 

[ashkeba]

Nearly half that £27bn is for maintenance, and the rest of it is for bypasses or junction improvements. Many of which also improve things for cyclists and bus users (e.g. the A14 rebuild near Huntingdon)

The A14 rebuild that cyclists are banned from, with no cycleways provided? I hope the plan offers better improvements than that project!

 

[gallafent]

And that will depend on where the electric comes from. Still huge amounts of fossil fuels in the base load generation. 34% currently gas turbine.

Of course, but the beauty of all electric propulsion is that as the generation mix changes, the climate footprint just improves naturally, without having to lift a finger on the railway side. And yes, it's 36% gas as I type, overall 184gCO2/kWh, but as we bring more solar (currently 15%) and wind (also currently 15%) online, with big battery storage arrays for load management, smart electric car charging with vehicle-to-grid making a “distributed battery” that adds to that capacity, and so on, … that CO2 output just goes inexorably down, and every electric train, even a 45-year-old PEP running on the Coastway or a 49-year-old tube train running on the Bakerloo, becomes cleaner “for free”. Decoupling the power source from the power user, using electricity as the way to transfer energy from former to latter, means that we can think completely separately about “where does the electricity come from”, since we simply have electric trains that automatically take advantage.

 

[A0wen]

The A14 rebuild that cyclists are banned from, with no cycleways provided? I hope the plan offers better improvements than that project!

Well if you mean the new bit of the A14 which by-passes Huntingdon entirely, then it's not exactly the kind of road you'd either want or expect to be cycling on. It was designed to take traffic away from the centre of Huntingdon and allow the removal of the old overbridge as well.

Putting a cycle lane along that new bit of the A14 would be akin to putting one alongside the M1.

 

[Ken H]

I'll believe it when a confirmed rolling plan of electrification actually is commenced. We would need to electrify at a rate faster than we ever have before to meet the 2050 target and doing all of the lines outlined in the Network Rail TDNS, something like 2-3x more electrification than we have ever done year on year before. The rail natter episode is a very good primer on the scale of works needed, I certainly hadn't seen quite how much it was.

Anecdotally it would also need to be a faster rate of electrification than anyone in Europe has ever managed at any point in history.

I'm all for the infill schemes, particularly to reduce freight running under the wires on diesel but its a tiny amount of the work that will be required. Effectively we are looking at HS2 scale investment at a time when HS2 spending is already ramping up (note I support HS2 and I do not believe that this is a reason to cancel or de-scope it.)

Forgive me if I am doubtful it will occur.

A cynic would also note that the 2040 ambition is not to "remove all diesel trains" (i.e. no use of diesel for traction) but "to remove all diesel only trains". So all the Bi-Mode units can happily run 10% of there journeys on electric and switch to diesel for the rest and meet the commitment....

that would be a good fudge. ticks the boxes.

 

[Grumpy Git]

Germany has a trial section

View attachment 99658

We will have really lost the plot if they propose to go down that road.

I've driven on that stretch of the A5 south of Frankfurt (between Frankfurt and Darmstadt) many times before and since. The infrastructure cost must be enormous?

 

[Ken H]

34% fossil fuels is somewhat better than a diesel train which is very inefficient!

maybe. but if electric trains get their energy from a non de-carbonised grid, they cant claim zero carbon.