3 ms·
Shame that article totally fails to measure what is actually important. It's not about energy efficiency, but about CO2 emmisions per passenger mile. In Europ
by mhandley 7y ago
Shame that article totally fails to measure what is actually important. It's not about energy efficiency, but about CO2 emmisions per passenger mile. In Europe, most trains are electric already. Around 50% of electricity in Europe is generated using renewables or nuclear, and this fraction is rapidly increasing. In France, Norway, Sweden and Austria, almost all electricity is renewable or nuclear. So electric trains cause very little CO2 emmisions in these locations. Electric cars are a medium term solution, but it's going to take a while to move the needle on CO2 emmissions, whereas trains can do so already. Large electric plans are a much more difficult proposition. The best bet there for decarbonization is probably to continue to use hydrocarbons, but to generate them from atmospheric CO2 using "spare" electricity from renewables, but that's going to cost a lot, make plane travel several times more expensive, and not likely to happen anytime soon. So, right now, in Europe, travelling by train rather than plane is a sensible call, and with high-speed rail, will usually take much less time than driving.