Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
I am sure you would prefer cheaper bills, as would everyone. Fortunately, low carbon electricity (renewables+nuclear) is much cheaper than the gas and coal plants it is replacing, especially right now with the high gas prices. This is part of the driver for the fast roll-out of wind and solar. Similarly, improving insulation will reduce demand for gas, and lead to lower bills, both for the households who upgrade (less gas/electricity means lower bills) and those that don't (on a european scale, it reduces the imbalance in supply and demand caused by Putin's invasion of Ukraine). Net-zero goals are not in conflict with acting on fuel poverty and the cost of living crisis. In fact, there are a lot of solutions that improve the situation for both
Well that’s fine, and that’s exactly what needs to be sold to people. Unfortunately “green levies” on electricity and gas bills have suggested otherwise. Heat pumps and better insulation also aren’t exactly cheap, last I checked.
There is certainly an argument for being less dependent on gas from abroad, but that’s separate and distinct from the green argument. Really we should have invested far more heavily in nuclear energy in the past, but it’s too late now and we were where we are.
Also, in another attempt to move back to the railways and the TDNS, I'll repeat this again:
As has been pointed out by other people, there are a lot of advantages to electrified railway even if you don't consider climate action at all, an incomplete list:
- Better air quality
- Better acceleration
- Lower running costs
- Sparks effect attracting more passengers
- Energy independence (UK produced nuclear and renewables don't rely on volatile international markets, like gas, coal and oil do)
I personally don't have much faith in the current government moving forward with railway electrification, despite the myriad of benefits. Hopefully the next government can be persuaded to start a rolling programme similar to Scotlands, so the benefits can be gained over increasingly many lines
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Well that’s fine, and that’s exactly what needs to be sold to people. Unfortunately “green levies” on electricity and gas bills have suggested otherwise. Heat pumps and better insulation also aren’t exactly cheap, last I checked.
The green levies include some levies that aren't in fact to do with decarbonisation.
Most of the green levies still around are in fact legacy levies, ie levies from subsidies when wind and solar where in their infancy. These will filter out as they reach their end dates. New wind in particular is very cheap
Insulation is very property dependent, but can often pay for itself
Heat pumps can be had for as little as £3000 (post subsidy) from Octopus Energy and British Gas, depending on circumstances, so not out line with the costs of replacing a gas boiler, and its running costs will be lower. Fortunately, much progress has been made recently on getting costs down.
There is certainly an argument for being less dependent on gas from abroad, but that’s separate and distinct from the green argument. Really we should have invested far more heavily in nuclear energy in the past, but it’s too late now and we were where we are.
I agree on the nuclear point, though I think we do need to try and make up for it by moving forward with Sizewell C construction and try to get permits through for 1 or 2 more nuclear power stations as quickly as possible (I've seen a suggestion for building one near Sellafield, as a replacement for local employment lost due to Sellafield ending reprocessing)
If you believe you can do environmental lobbying/action/advocating/fill in whatever word you prefer to describe trying to get society as a whole to improve better I would strongly encourage you to get involved in whatever way you think is most effective!
Maybe I already do. But let's be very clear here, as @43066 has very well articulated any solutions will not work in the real world if they adversely effect people. So green taxes will always be pushed back on, more expensive greener vehicles will see much slower take up, carbon free energy generation needs a workable storage solution, trying to shame people from travelling will provoke a two fingered salute.
And that is the reality the environmental lobby needs to get it's head around is that you cannot expect everyone else to give up what they have worked hard for. Shaming, blaming or trying to scare people into what they want people to do is going to get the response that they deserve. Work with people, economies, governments or it won't work. That is how it is.
The electricity grid is decarbonising quickly, and even on current carbon intensity, electrification massively reduces carbon emissions. Of course, the savings only get bigger as the grid gets greener. Which isn't to say we don't need to do more there. Time to start construction on Sizewell C, and get another new nuclear power station approved, as well as further roll-out of renewables.
That claim regarding EV charging is amost certainly wrong, and certainly has no data backing it. All coal power stations are closing by the end of 2024 anyway.
Sorry but you are being misled if you believe that is so. There is absolutely zero chance of UK Electrical generation being carbon free by 2030.
There is about 3.6 GW of Offshore Wind Farms currently under construction and about another 3.6 GW in pre-construction.
The only UK Nuclear Power plant under construction is Hinkley Point C which if it is on time will begin 50% of capacity generation in about 2027-8.
Unless the existing plants are given life extensions UK Nuclear generation will dip and wont recover until mid-late 2030s. There is currently no additional capacity authorised. The earliest that a SMR could reach test generation would be the early 2030s and I understand that Rolls Royce have already entered in to agreements with foreign governments which means it wont be in the UK. Interconnector wise the Viking Link 1.4 GW is well under way and there will be another link to France 1 GW I believe.
Plans for huge solar farms and tidal energy systems are just that plans and in the tidal energy its largely theoretical as nobody makes the equipment because no similar schemes exists.
What this means is that any large marginal use of electricity in the UK railway electrification etc etc will largely be met by Gas Turbine Generation for at least the next 10 years (some would say longer).
I agree about the EV charging and coal plants hence why I laughed. However EVs in general on a global scale dont reduce carbon emissions they just move it away from the tailpipe imho.
Sorry but you are being misled if you believe that is so. There is absolutely zero chance of UK Electrical generation being carbon free by 2030.
There is about 3.6 GW of Offshore Wind Farms currently under construction and about another 3.6 GW in pre-construction.
The only UK Nuclear Power plant under construction is Hinkley Point C which if it is on time will begin 50% of capacity generation in about 2027-8.
Agree that Nuclear is the elephant in the room but it's not quite so bad, because the EPRs at Hinkley and Sizewell are three times the size of the AGRs they are replacing. So there will indeed be a dip in the early 2030s but the shortfall thereafter is only about 2Gw over what we have today. One additional twin EPR (over those already committed) would leave us with more capacity than the entire current running AGR fleet.
But they do, simply because large combustion power stations are about twice as efficient as ICE vehicles. Hence electrification is nearly always beneficial even if the grid is combustion based. With the current UK energy mix electrification is a no brainer, even if the grid emissions go backwards a bit.
Agree that Nuclear is the elephant in the room but it's not quite so bad, because the EPRs at Hinkley and Sizewell are three times the size of the AGRs they are replacing. So there will indeed be a dip in the early 2030s but the shortfall thereafter is only about 2Gw over what we have today. One additional twin EPR (over those already committed) would leave us with more capacity than the entire current running AGR fleet.
But they do, simply because large combustion power stations are about twice as efficient as ICE vehicles. Hence electrification is nearly always beneficial even if the grid is combustion based. With the current UK energy mix electrification is a no brainer, even if the grid emissions go backwards a bit.
That's not really true, both Hinkley and Sizewell are 3.2 GW plants but they each comprise 2 x 1.6GW reactors. Unit 1 of Hinkley is due to generate in June 2027 but unit 2 won't be fuelled until the first refuelling of Unit 1 about 2 years later. Unit 1 of Sizewell C is due to start generating sometime in 2036 assuming there's no problems with Hinkley and will follow the same pattern so in all likelihood we won't be back to what we have now until nearly 2040.In all reality even if it was approved today a third EPR site wouldn't be commissioned until well after 2040.
Youre not taking in to account the extra carbon emissions of manufacturing EVs (vice ICEs) primarily the mining refining and transportation of so much Lithium ore.
The average EV will not better a modern reduced emissions ICE in many tens (or hundreds). of thousands of miles. In fact in many cases the reality is the EV will be scrapped before it reaches the stage where it has whole life global emissions less than a comparable ICE.
Id agree that electrification is beneficial from a purely railway aspect but the reality is that the benefits in terms of carbon reduction are pretty small in a UK Global view. If you have limited resources you'd be much better off spending them on the electrical generation system or even projects like electrifying the M1 and M6 for HGVs.
That's not really true, both Hinkley and Sizewell are 3.2 GW plants but they each comprise 2 x 1.6GW reactors. Unit 1 of Hinkley is due to generate in June 2027 but unit 2 won't be fuelled until the first refuelling of Unit 1 about 2 years later. Unit 1 of Sizewell C is due to start generating sometime in 2036 assuming there's no problems with Hinkley and will follow the same pattern so in all likelihood we won't be back to what we have now until nearly 2040.In all reality even if it was approved today a third EPR site wouldn't be commissioned until well after 2040.
Indeed, I was putting the Best possible case, which is that if EPRs come on stream as planned the UK grid wont be rapidly de-carbonised as Trainbike believed. If the EPRs are late it will be even worse.
Just a reminder that this is a thread specifically about decarbonising the Railway. If anyone wants to discuss anything else such as power station strategy etc then they are welcome to start a new thread elsewhere.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
