In the current climate of scrutiny regarding the United Kingdom’s energy security, the recently published House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee report, ‘Accelerating the transition from fossil fuels and securing energy supplies’, serves as a wake-up call.
Among the myriad elements that contribute to energy security, rail infrastructure emerges as an indispensable but often underrated player.
The transport sector’s substantial dependence on oil amplifies the need for alternative, more sustainable means of transportation.
Welcome to the first instalment in a three-part series exploring the intricate relationship between rail infrastructure and the United Kingdom’s energy security. In this opening article, we’ll unpack why the rail network is essential in bolstering the nation’s energy security, particularly in light of the country’s commitment to greener, more sustainable energy solutions. The subsequent articles in the series will focus on how electric vehicles’ linkage to the rail network can further strengthen the UK’s energy security and the electrification of the rail network and its potential as a renewable energy powerhouse.
Recent statistics further fuel this discussion, revealing that despite a 2% increase in CO2e emissions for passenger and freight rail between April 2021 and March 2022, the rail network represents a comparatively more sustainable mode of transport.
This article delves into the nuances of why the rail network is so crucial in enhancing the UK’s energy security.
Rail Infrastructure: A Closer Look at Emissions
The latest data on the consumption of diesel and electricity in the UK’s mainline rail operations presents a nuanced picture. There was an overall 2% rise in estimated CO2e emissions, reaching 2,282 kilotonnes for the year from April 2021 to March 2022. Although this might initially appear concerning, it’s important to dissect these figures further.
When normalised, passenger emissions for electric trains were recorded at 358g CO2e per electric vehicle kilometre, substantially lower than the 1,400g CO2e per diesel vehicle kilometre. What’s even more telling is the drop in emissions from electric trains despite an overall rise in electricity consumption. This shift is due to the electricity generation landscape gradually moving towards greener, more renewable sources.
Why Rail Is Key to Energy Security
The question then arises: Why is the rail network so pivotal to the UK’s energy security? There are several reasons.
Reduced Dependence on Oil: As highlighted in the Environmental Audit Committee report, transport is heavily oil-dependent. Transitioning to electrified rail networks, particularly for freight, can significantly reduce this dependence.
Flexibility for Renewable Integration: The electric rail network is more adaptable to integrating renewable energy sources, as evidenced by the decreasing emissions despite increased electricity consumption. This makes it easier for the UK to pivot towards renewable sources for a considerable portion of its transport energy needs.
Strategic Energy Distribution: Railways have long been a part of the energy distribution framework, transporting coal, oil, and equipment for renewable energy projects. Modernising this infrastructure could make it a more efficient and less carbon-intensive means of distributing energy resources across the country.
Energy-efficient Transport: According to the statistics, electrified rail is far more energy-efficient in terms of emissions per kilometre compared to diesel-based road transport. This inherent efficiency makes rail a preferred choice for the green transition, aligning with both national and international goals.
Policy Integration and Future Investments
While initiatives like electrified tracks are a step in the right direction, they are far from sufficient. As underscored by an Environmental Audit Committee report, the existing policy framework—particularly the British Energy Security Strategy—has so far paid inadequate attention to making the transport system more energy-efficient.
Significant investments are needed in rail infrastructure modernisation, including advanced signalling systems and track electrification, to align these efforts more coherently with broader energy security and environmental sustainability goals.
The rail network is not just a means of transport; it’s a crucial element in the fabric of the United Kingdom’s energy security. The network’s ability to provide a less carbon-intensive form of transportation renders it invaluable in the quest for a greener future. In light of the recent emissions statistics, rail transport stands out as an effective vehicle for the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources.
Incorporating rail more significantly into the UK’s energy security strategy could be a game-changing move in meeting the country’s climate objectives and fortifying its energy security in the long term.
God.. imagine being S&T or P Way doing a Line Block amongst that Labyrinth. 😳
I once read an article, wish I could remember it, that had a ground eye view of the lines coming into a large station in (I think) the north…. it made this look simple.
Translation, please, Daniele…
Hi, sorry.
S&T, Signals and Telecommunications, are the 3 person teams who go out on track to fix, maintain signals, points and other complex infrastructure.
P way, Permanent Way, similar though often larger teams who deal with the track, lifting and packing, patrolling looking for rail issues, maintain fishplates, and so on. In the old days stereotyped by a bare chested guy with a spade over his shoulder and fag hanging out his mouth. One still sees many of their disused p way huts along railwaylines.
Much of this work goes on when trains are running, and so “line blocks” are taken with signallers ( me ) inbetween the service to protect sections of track so P Way and S & T can go and do their job.
In areas like that photo, very dangerous as lines may be open all around you, and mistakes happen if the team stray onto an open line or the Signalman screws up.
One P Way lad in my route was beheaded a few years ago after moving slightly into the path of an open line as he got disoriented.
A train is actually very quiet until it’s virtually on top of you, by which time it’s usually too late. And you might not hear the driver sounding his horn.
Lots of things from a lookout to safety gadgets exist, both on track and in the signal box to reduce the dangers, and if rules and safety protocols are followed then the risks are much reduced.
What panel do you work?
Hi Luke. Why do you ask?
I’m a driver. Down in the Westcountry.
Ah, ok. I’m Wessex route.
I don’t envy the guys who work near the spicy rail. That stuff terrifies me. One lapse of concentration, one piece of loose equipment, one other tired guy stumbles and it’s a horror show. OLE should be the only method. It’s ugly as sim though and will never be expanded down here. Probably won’t even get to Bristol Temple Meads with this appalling government throwing us back into managed decline.
*sin. Where’s the edit button gone?
Ah, found it. Managed to flag my own comment lol.
Agreed. In an older box I was in we’d have to go and wind points if they failed before a MOM arrived, and I was very wary of the juice rail. I’d never work on track with it.
Yes, OLE so much better.
There are plans to overhead Reading to Southampton FLT via Mortimer as it’s a freight route but it won’t happen in my career.
It will never happen since the onward electrification to Oxford and up to the Midlands was abandoned. It was all part of the same scheme. GWR electrification was a disaster and the knock on effects are still only just being seen. Rolling stock in the West of England is 30-40 years old and failing rapidly. There is not enough to cascade and even those Thames Turbos were built 94-96.
We need to invest in rail for so many reasons.
Energy security is just one part of it, we can talk about how Electrified Rail provides health benefits to anyone living near the tracks (trains go through neighbourhoods, if your route isn’t electrified congratulations you’re getting exhaust fumes in your back yard). We can talk about how good regular rail service reduces car dependency and results in lower infrastrcuture maintenance costs (fewer people use the roads the less we have to spend on them, as card do horrible damage to roads).
And then there’s the fact that if we want to move heavy military equipment quickly in a permissive environment, rail really is the best way to do it.
Why is having everything dependant on electricity secure? If you’re then going to move any transportable fuels around using electricity that means knockout electricity supply or reduce it and we’re paralysed. JCB’s hydrogen engine seems a very good option along with biofuels fuels developed from sustainable sources.
Because electricity is power source agnostic.
You’re talking about tactical level energy security, which is why any power grid should have redundancy built in.
I’m talking about strategic energy security. An electric train doesn’t care if you generate the electricity via wind, coal, oil, natural gas, hydro, solar, or tidal power.
Thought experiment: Say you’re friendly neighbour is providing you with cheap oil, so you get lots of cars, have all your trains run on diesel, maybe get your power plants oil based, it’s nice and cheap, except you know oil heated households is a bit of a bother so instead most of your houses run on natural gas.
Now there’s a government change, or world events happen and your friendly oil providing neighbour tells you “Hey if you want this oil cheap you’ll do as I tell you. In fact I might just cut you off.” You’re dependent on him now, so you’ll do as he says.
If everything was electric then, okay, that sucks because a portion of your power grid is maybe powered by oil, but I can introduce rolling blackouts, sorry Timmy your homework will need an extension, but we can keep public infrastructure running, and you know what, it’s summer, so we can fire up the natural gas plants and make up some of that negative energy differential, and in the end it’s a lot easier to replace a few oil power plants with Nuclear or Solar or Gas or Tidal than it is to try to replace our entire infrastructure.
There are some flaws in this over reliance on electricity in my opinion. Firstly we’re not planning on any other fuels other than renewables, some token nuclear although that’s not the focus of the next government. The more you load the grid with trains, house hold heating, hold heating, industry switching from gas to electric for processes, cars, trucks, buses, construction equipment…. you need massive redundancy in renewables just to keep that lot running. its not just that the wind need to blow or the sun needs to shine if the wind is weak or there’s clouds or the suns low in the sky the energy you generate is much lower. Then you need to generate additional power to store when renewables aren’t producing. And all that capacity and storage needs to be connected and connect with redundancy. We’re at risk atm because we have gas storage of about 2 weeks, we’re unlikely to get 2 weeks of storage of for renewables, even more so with all the future load on the grid.
If the winds blowing up north and not down south I need to shift that power south, yes we do that today to a lesser degree but we’re talking about massive increase in power transmission.
Those rolling blackouts won’t just hit homes and Timmy’s homework but people ability to recharge there work van!! Unless we envisage the millions of trades people in UK using the train to get to work 🙂
So we’ll have a single source of energy needed at point of use with 99% on the entire economy.
I remember living overseas and being hit with power cuts, the temperature was almost 50 degrees C. Thankfully the car ran on petrol and had AC, so we could get some relieve siting in the car for an hour.
imo energy security also needs energy diversity = mix. That mix can be renewables including biofuels and synthetic fuels or using carbon capture or offsetting to mitigate the climate impact.
There also a military aspect, we currently rely primarily on diesel. An we have a nice network of refineries and logistics = resilience. Once the rest of the country is electric will it be economical to keep a single refinery open to provide the military? Better to have a flourishing biofuels commercial domestic market and to have that you need a volume of customers. I do wonder how long it will take to charge a MBT with Tesla fast charger :). We should perhaps consider sails again for RN vessels 🙂
The whole premise that renewable electricity is going to provide cheap and secure energy is flawed.
Spot on, in all areas. I’m still fuming that Royal Mail decided to do away with the Post Office railway and instead use vans to cross London. And I’d say the same for longer distance mail where long distance mail trains, complete with sorting office, were once a thing.
As for the military, I hope that capability can be regenerated and eplacement units for 79 Sqn RLC and 275 Troop from the reserves arrive, both stupidly cut in the years after the 2010 SDSR.
And just as the Britsh Army moved most remaining armour of the 3 AI Bdes to Bks around SPTA. Just seems so illogical to me.
Russia makes extensive use of the railways and so should we, beyond the occasional MoD train into Kineton or Didcot.
I understand beyond elements of one of the STREs we have no military railway capability left?
Ironically we used to do a lot of rail moves for our armour when it was based in Germany. As recently as 2016, as seen here, we used to load them up to take them from their camps to the ranges.
https://collection.nam.ac.uk/images/960/242000-242999/242793.jpg
And yeah, I think it’s just that one STRE that’s left.
Thanks, thought so.
Probably can’t do that here because of our restricted gauge.
still a rail link to Ludgershall and Marchwood port
There is, we talked with Graham at length about that a few months ago as he was doubting it’s current status as most of the depot had gone.
Marchwood SMC, Kineton, Bicester, Pigs Bay, Ashchurch, Longtown, Ludgershall, Glen Douglas all still have railway access. Might be others I forget. Think there was a link towards one of the ranges up north, forget it’s name.
Bar Shoeburyness ( Pigs Bay ) these are strategic sites and those rail access points are too. They need enhancing if possible.
Network rail were sending trains up the track which would seem to indicate the line is still live to Ludgershall. It could also be down to the MOD to pay as well for the rail connection ( this is simlear to what the NCB and BS had to pay for there own rail links)
As long as at the end there is the space to assemble heavy vehicles and load onto a train. Looking at the site there appears to be.
Energy security is all well and good. 2 points though 1) if you go bankrupt as a nation trying to achieve it, it becomes irrelevant. 2) Energy security also means you must be able to protect the energy infrastructure, to remove dependency on foreign supplies of easily transportable fuels and then have an physical infrastructure that’s difficult to protect isn’t energy security.
I agree investment is need in the railways and priority is reducing costs and therefore much more automation is a must. Heck aircraft can operate autonomously in 3 dimension, a train operates in 1 dimension It seems we someway behind rail automation.
https://www.railtech.com/rolling-stock/2022/05/12/east-japan-railway-plans-trial-runs-with-automated-commuter-train/?gdpr=accept
https://www.railway-technology.com/news/db-siemens-automatic-train-germany/?cf-view
The backbone of energy security and Mick Lynch can (and does) bring it all to halt at his whim….
Can anyone guess how much money ‘one out all out’ Lynch has lost in the never ending strikes?
It’s a nice round number🤣
You probably meant internment. But interment would be better!
A bit strong perhaps John! Perhaps we could just call 1977 and ask if they want their union leader back?🤣🤣
It’s the barely concealed smile on his face when being interviewed that gets me every time, absolutely loves the chaos and misery he causes, obviously gets his jollies from it…..
A good mate of mine had an old school friend he had stayed in contact with, he was the FBU leader in his area, I can say for a fact he used to absolutely savour the ‘ trouble’….
The full “property is theft” coal fired socialist rant, every time you saw him….
I couldn’t stand the twat and he couldn’t stand me….
Just wait until dithering Starmer is in No10, if you think we have strikes now, just wait until their Union backers call in a few favours and find no new money for massive pay rises….
The bloody lot will be out again, union banners flying!
I will confidently predict the winter of 24/25 is going to be a new very cold winter of discontent…..
Hi mate.
As a railwayman myself, I disagreed with the strikes regards wages, as we’re well paid already, especially drivers.
But then you have closing ticket offices too, so the dear old lady who wants now to get a ticket can not, as she’s not up to speed with internet, apps, and all the rest. And neither and I, and I’m only 51….
And rail operators also want to maximise their profits by having DOO Driver only operated trains, by getting rid of the Guard.
Another lunacy, for all sorts of reasons.
So for those last 2 at least, ticket offices and DOO, I support Lynch, even if he is a raging Trot who supports Corbyn, Russia, and all the rest.
I support railway nationalisation. It’s meant to be a service for the paying public, and a strategic asset. Not a means of profit for shareholders in some far off land…
Afternoon Daniele,
Fully understood mate, my main issue is with Lynch, he actually seems hell bent on destroying the railway!
I know so many folks who have given up and are car sharing again…
Nationalisation is a tricky one, BR was atrocious, as we all remember, because it was allowed to wither on the vine, privatisation was supposed to cure all, it hasn’t really worked like that though has it…
I don’t know what the answer is mate, but its not Lynch!
It is a tricky one, as how is it paid for, just like all the other stuff sold off into private hands from water to energy.
The service is not even back to pre covid levels, at least, not in my area.
The cost of servicing that one dear old lady that wants to buy a ticket is getting out of hand, perhaps we can sell tickets through the NHS or just let her ride without one.
Waiting in various British rail ticket offices over the decades is the closets thing I have ever experienced like going to purgatory.
Trainline app is the best thing to ever happen to railways since diesel. We need to stop giving excuses as to why people can’t use it. Everyone has a smart phone.
Morning Jim.
Except everyone doesn’t, most elderly people I know would not have a clue.
I guess society is waiting for them to just die off, then as we ourselves become elderly we know how to use such things…
Rail is woefully inefficient use of land and doesn’t make a lot of sense in a country as small as we are.
Just an idea; Pave it all. No more HGV or coaches on motorways (up the speed limit to 80/90). Not sure what we do about caravans…
Anyway, use electrification for Aussie style road trains running off overhead lines for multiple units and same for normal HGVs and electrified coaches. Speed limit up to 70 since they’re off the motorway. Battery tech and/or hybrid is developed enough for them to use overhead power on the ‘rail’ and switch to internal for final leg.
Can have passenger service every 5 minutes instead of waiting an hour. ‘Bendy bus’ makes sense on ‘rail’. Passenger and freight can use existing stations or pull off onto A and B roads to reach final destination.
As for “less carbon”. So bored of this nonsense. NUCLEAR power! It’s been the obvious answer since I was at school & yet we still have cowards unwilling to embrace it. See France for proof it works.
If you actually bothered to look up the acreage of land required for motorways rather than rail, you would see what bollocks your statement is.
Bit rude. Was suggesting we pave over the existing rail. Not add more motorways… the existing rail is largely unused acreage since the frequency of trains using is so low.
Stu, a main line railway is a FAR better utilizer of space than a motorway. One container train puts many dozens of lorries back in the garage! Sadly the Achilles Heel is having to rely on with the staff.
But given that trains run on rails, that might be a thing of the past eventually. The DLR already doesn’t need drivers in it’s trains.
You sound like a 1960’s town planner 😀
Interesting thoughts! I enjoyed visualising that.
But if most of our lines are actually in suburban areas then you’ll still have HGVs and coaches on motorways, as there are fewer long distance routes. And due to Beechings cuts, many areas of the UK have no railway at all.
And what of level crossings? Existing road traffic will just join these new “roads” at those points and clog the lot up like local urban roads.
And what are you going to do with the freight sector? It will be effectively back on the “road” again taking longer to reach its destination. And many freight trains will not be moving at your proposed speed.
This “unused acreage” you mention? Where? The “lineside” and “Cess” on rail lines are all part of the railway and all needed for access to maintain it. So if you paved the lot, you’ll still need access to maintain.
Fun ideas, but not feasible for me at least.
Very good points.
I’d be interested (as a thought exercise if nothing else) to see where motorways are that railways aren’t.
Hadn’t considered level crossings – non-HGV/Coach would be banned from converted rail lines, but if in near constant use instead of 2 trains an hour, that would be a problem.
Yep, all freight on the road, albeit not motorways – those that aren’t ‘road train’ type things could still use all other roads. Maybe not 70 then. We find a speed a road train can maintain safely. Not sure how this would take longer? How fast are freight trains? Would load/unload times be affected?
By ‘unused acreage’ I mean the lines sit empty most of the time. There’s a twin line near me that has 2 trains per hour. That’s 30 miles of track that’s empty (not being used) for 99% of the time. If I go to the nearby mainline, there’s a train every 5 min. Compare that to the volume of traffic on the M6, I’d say it’s mostly unused (has to be for safety).
It’ll never happen; too much upfront investment, too much disruption to shipping, too many union jobs gone. Just thinking outside the box as I do actually think rail is pretty naff, 100 year old technology that’s had its day. Don’t get me started on HS2 & the billions we’re flushing away on that.
Right got you regards efficiency of use and railway land.
Freight trains have different speeds depending in weight, load, and such. For signallers, they are classes 3,4,6,7,8.
Constant use may well become an issue in suburban areas depending on number of HGV as many railways run along people’s back gardens. I thibk they’ll end up more irritated by road noise than an occasional, but louder, train.
I don’t support it myself, but great fun to visualise it and how in a future universe it would work.
👍🏼
Also car infrastructure is WAY more inefficient than rail. Look at the difference required to move the same number of people by rail and by car:
https://youtu.be/oDGNNxY56k0?si=62RY0j5WREaXkk0W&t=13m24s
Seen such videos. Very valid points. They do like to cherry pick their examples though (just saying).
But I’m not proposing use rail as extra normal roads. I’m proposing something just cargo, coaches and things like the Scania here https://vehiclehelp.com/biggest-buses-in-the-world/ with a capacity of 280 but running off the overhead power lines. Not cars so we’ve increased density and more of them than existing passenger trains. More convenient increases use.
Also, HGV & coaches all running at the same speed, have a much closer following distance than you or I in a car. All professional drivers, not Doris in her mini entering the motorway at 45mph making them swerve, or some muppet in a Range Rover who forgot about his exit cutting them off. You see it on motorways with trucks already following closely. Especially plausible give radar guided cruise control, auto braking systems and AI vehicles. Minimal on/off ramps as the longer vehicles could load/offload passengers in existing stations in the centre of towns. Longer Cargo road-trains only go to existing cargo depots. Standard HGVs and coaches are the only things needing on/off ramps. I’m sure they could be created using existing entryways for railway maintenance crews. To link to A-roads.
Anyway, as I said, never happening. Just an interesting thought experiment.
It’s not really cherry picked, the issue is you are confusing activity with through put. Because a single train can move so much more than any single truck or car you get more through put with considerably less vehicles. So 2 trains per hour on an Azuma 800 5 car means 700 people (assuming no standing room) can be moved in each direction. This is way more efficient than highways (and also requires a much smaller footprint).
So your suggesting replacing rail with a much less efficient type of service, one that gets stuck in traffic, has a lower top speed, requires more fuel due to rolling resistance, carries fewer passengers, and damages it’s infrastructure way faster than trains do (heavy goods vehicles are terrible for road surfaces).
As you said, it’ll never happen, and thank god for that, because we could neither afford it, nor would anyone want it, nor would it be any improvement.
Oh, I’ve just remembered who you are. 👋🏻
Okay off you run then.
My local railway, the London Underground, has trains running every two to three minutes. The frequency of passenger services isn’t limited by track versus concrete.
This is b******s. You can’t electrify your entire transport network and hope to power it with intermittent renewables. In terms of national security and resilience, it’s the exact opposite of what we should be planning.
If you want to move away from reliance on fossil fuels, baseload nuclear is the only solution. Then you need to make sure that nuclear plants can be fully defended against both physical and cyber attacks.
Ah, someone else with common sense! Nuclear is the only answer. 👍🏼
Renewable generation stats do show it works a lot of the time. Having base generation is important and top gas whenever it’s needed. Most importantly storage. Whether pump, flywheel, battery and so on.
You’re quite right about storage. A big part of why I’m not convinced on renewables.
There is only 1 coal fired power station remaining in the UK ,that only supplies power on an as required basis and is due to close in 2025 ,mass rail movement finished 7 years ago ,due to the UK government climate policy to decarbonise energy supply by 2025.
Electric haulage of freight is laughable, the network may be wired but there are so few locos available ,and those that are are all over 30 years old and obsolete ,so massive investment is required ,the freight operating companies will baulk at the lease costs for them ,similarly there is a shortage of wagons of all types ,to move whatever commodities need to be moved .
Staff wise there is a shortage of train drivers ,and over the next 10 years 40% will be due to retire ,the rail industry is not geared up to replace them at present .
Energy security is only achieved when we become energy independent something that will never happen as the parasites who are running the show are fully onboard with the “Green Agenda” the sole intent of which is to impoverish the West.
This island sits on an abundance of fossil fuel including a trillion and a half in shale gas enough to give us cheap energy for decades .
meanwhile in China , India and Russia ………
🏴🇬🇧
Trains are great if they go where you want and depart from where you are. I never got on an actual train to go somewhere until I was 22. Been on 7 since then.
That many! 😆
This is why the Beeching cuts where devestating in the UK, it created great parts of the country that just don’t have service.
Exactly.
I’m outside Edinburgh and we have a fantastic bus service from Lothian buses. I am 40-50 mins on a bus to then 5 min walk to Waverley train station. Only place I’ve went on a train to is to Glasgow.
That’s just not easier than a car going from home 99% of the time.
Train is better if ur going into a city centre.
Trains/underground/buses do seem to work well in big cities and surrounding areas if they are frequent enough.