Enhanced and expanded rail for freight
Railways are among the most efficient and least carbon-intensive transport modes to move surface freight, particularly compared with road and inland waterways. Hence, shifting freight from road to rail is potentially one of the best ways to decarbonise freight transport, especially considering the major technical, operational and commercial challenges of obtaining zero-tailpipe-emission trucks. Electrified railways are a mature technology, in widespread use, with a century of existence.
Rail has been particularly suited to move low-value, high-density goods over long distances, thus it has a dominant share of the modal split in countries rich in resources such as Australia, Brazil, Canada, the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, South Africa and the United States and in Central Asia. In certain developing economies, e.g. in Africa, India and in South America, where there is a lack of available infrastructure, there is ample room for rail freight to grow in this traditional role.
Containerisation gave rise to new intermodal operational patterns and market segments for railways. In Europe the transport of containers, swap bodies, semi‑trailers and even full trucks on rail (rolling highways) has gained an increasing share of rail transport, providing the opportunity to shift from road to rail. However, the overall mode split on the continent has not changed significantly over the last two decades. The development of inland dry ports, connected by adequate rail infrastructure to deep-sea ports and employment of rail to connect ports to the hinterland, is one of the most promising ways to increase rail freight volumes and encourage a shift from road to rail globally. Smaller and more austere terminals are a possibility to recapture traffic lost to road-based competition or to act as a pioneer model to develop new traffic which could be won and retained on rail. These could be reactivated dormant or redundant rail-linked sites.
Nonetheless, even if there is room for modal shift, there are limits to the share of freight that can be transported by rail, particularly for low-volume shipments where consolidation is challenging, or where distribution patterns are fragmented or where last-mile deliveries are required.
On average, trains are eight times more energy-efficient than trucks per tonne of freight carried. The emissions intensity of freight rail is nearly ten times lower than that of trucks (in tonne-kilometres). Electric traction has zero emissions at the point of use and can be carbon-neutral using hydro, solar and wind energy. Electrified traction effectively breaks the dependency of transport on liquid hydrocarbon inputs. The exact CO2 benefits of rail freight compared with road depend on various parameters, e.g. on average loads, the energy source for the train (electric or diesel), the energy mix of the electric grid, the size of the train and the need of last-/first-mile road components in the overall transport trip chain.
Electric trains in Europe or heavy large trains in the United States compare much better with trucks than a smaller diesel-powered train not fully loaded. Rail movements not requiring a road component (e.g. between a port and large industrial sites or mines) or where the road component is minimised (e.g. between a port and an inland dry port) compare more favourably than when extensive road transport is required at the end/start of the rail component.
From Basel, Switzerland, to the Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands, CO2 emissions from rail are eight times less than from road transport, but on other routes this gap can be lower.
Costs for adapting/expanding passenger rail infrastructure can vary greatly by region as well as the prevailing terrain. Costs will also depend on the type of infrastructure that is being built or enhanced.
The following cost estimates for deploying rail infrastructure and vehicles can be identified in the available literature:
Costs for new rail tracks:
- new, single-track, electrified line per kilometre: EUR 5 million (euros) (depending on the region and project requirements, e.g. if extensive bridges or tunnels are necessary this cost can increase significantly)
- overhead line electrification (catenary) per kilometre: EUR 0.5 million to EUR 2 million (reduced costs of electrification could be achieved through the use of alternatives [composites] for support masts which are quicker and easier to install and last twice that of equivalent steel structures with minimal through life maintenance, e.g. painting).
Costs at ports for connections to rail infrastructure:
- small dry ports: USD 5 million (US dollars) (can be upgraded by stages)
- very large dry ports: up to USD 175 million (e.g. North Baltimore, Ohio, in the United States).
Costs for rolling stock:
- New locomotives average EUR 1 million to EUR 3 million, depending upon the specification.
- Alternative micro‑/nano‑locomotives for small fast train applications can cost <EUR 1.0 million and could be used to service flows where more expensive larger locomotives become an excessive component in the cost base.
- New wagons/rail cars can cost between EUR 50 000 and EUR 150 000.
In Europe, the average external costs (which also include noise, accidents and local pollutants) of rail are 3.2 times lower compared only with heavy goods vehicles (heavy trucks). Other benefits include reduced congestion, enhanced road safety, lower air pollutants, lower impacts on land use (less space occupied by the infrastructure) and infrastructure attrition.
Increased energy safety and resilience can also be an important advantage. In some world regions, rail electrification is widespread and is a mature technology. Electricity can be produced from different sources, reducing dependency from a single commodity and limited supply origins.
Rail also has lower unit costs, particularly for high volumes, and provides much higher capacity than roads (required for the development of certain economic activities and sectors).
Noise and local pollution can be an issue in areas surrounding lines and terminals, particularly in urban or densely occupied areas.
As rail infrastructure is expensive (although the costs of a conventional rail line or terminal are significantly lower than high-speed rail), respective investments should be directed to regions and flows that can generate the adequate volumes for rail transport. Port-hinterland connections are particularly suitable to be connected by rail.
ITF (2021) Transport Climate Action Directory – Enhanced and expanded rail for freight
https://www.itf-oecd.org/policy/enhanced-and-expanded-rail-for-freight
Bickford, E. et al. (2014) Emissions and air quality impacts of truck-to-rail freight modal shifts in the Midwestern United States. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24004244
CER and UIC (2015) Rail Transport and Environment Facts and Figures. http://www.cer.be/publications/latest-publications/rail-transport-and-environment-facts-figures
De Bod, A. and J.H. Havenga (2010) Sub-Saharan Africa's Rail Freight Transport System: Potential Impact of Densification on Cost. http://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/16053
European Commission (2019) Handbook on the external costs of transport - version 2019. https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/sustainable-transport/internalisation-transport-external-costs_en
European Commission/DG Move, Swiss Confederation Federal Office of Transport (2019) Observation and analysis of transalpine freight traffic flows Key figures 2018. https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/2019-alpine-traffic-observatory-key-figures-2018.pdf
Hanaoka, S. and M.B. Regmi (2011) Promoting intermodal freight transport through the development of dry ports in Asia: An environmental perspective. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0386111211000148
IEA in collaboration with UIC (2019) The Future of Rail Opportunities for energy and the environment. http://www.oecd.org/publications/the-future-of-rail-9789264312821-en.htm
Kaack et al. (2018) Decarbonizing intraregional freight systems with a focus on modal shift. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aad56c
Lättilä, Henttu and Hilmola (2013) Hinterland operations of seaports do matter: Dry port usage effects on transportation costs and CO2 emissions. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1366554513000574
Pangotra and Shukla (2012) Infrastructure for Low-Carbon Transport in India: A Case Study of the Delhi-Mumbai Dedicated Freight Corridor. https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/8492/-Infrastructure%20for%20low%20carbon%20transport%20in%20India_%20a%20case%20study%20of%20the%20Delhi-Mumbai%20dedicated%20freight%20corridor.-2012DFC_FullReport.pdf?sequence=3
SGKV, IFEU (2001) Comparative Analysis of Energy Consumption and CO Emissions of Road Transport and Combined Transport Road/Rail. https://www.iru.org/resources/iru-library/comparative-analysis-energy-consumption-and-co2-emissions-road-transport-and
UIC and IEA (2017) Railway Handbook on Energy Consumption and CO2 Emissions 2017 Edition Focus on passenger rail services. https://uic.org/uic-iea-railway-handbook
Van den Berg and Langen (2011) Hinterland strategies of port authorities: A case study of the port of Barcelona. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885911000229
Zurich Process - Working group (2016) Heavy Goods Traffic Management Systems in the Alpine Area - Review on Combined Transport in Alpine countries . http://www.zurich-process.org/en/key-bodiesresults/the-present-structure/3-working-groups/heavy-vehicle-transport-management-instruments/
Printer-friendly version