Cost-effective decarbonisation: prioritising investments in rail infrastructure (Part 2 of 5)

This is part two of a five-part series on decarbonising the rail industry. You can find part one, three and four here.

Decarbonising the rail industry is critical to global efforts to combat climate change. However, achieving significant emissions reductions requires substantial investment, and not all decarbonisation strategies offer the same return on investment. Prioritising cost-effective solutions is essential to maximise environmental benefits while ensuring economic viability. This article explores how rail infrastructure investments can be strategically directed to achieve the most significant impact in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The economic challenge of decarbonising rail stations

Rail stations are complex structures with significant energy demands. Many historical buildings have architectural constraints, making retrofits and upgrades challenging and costly. As I pointed out during a recent webinar on decarbonising rail stations, "Given that Scope 3 emissions account for the majority of the emissions of the train station, do we really need to focus on doing solar panels, doing fabric improvements at buildings?"

Decisions on where to allocate limited resources are critical. Investments must balance the need for substantial emissions reductions with the practicality and cost-effectiveness of the solutions. High-cost interventions may only sometimes yield proportionate environmental benefits, especially when considering the broader context of the rail industry's emissions.

Assessing decarbonisation options

Various strategies are available to reduce emissions from rail stations and infrastructure. These include:

• Building insulation and fabric improvements: Upgrading insulation, glazing, and sealing can reduce energy consumption for heating and cooling

• Renewable energy installations: Installing solar panels or other renewable energy sources to supply station energy needs

• Modernizing vehicle fleets: Investing in alternative fuel infrastructure and transitioning to electric or hybrid vehicles for associated transport services

• Waste management enhancements: Implementing recycling programs and waste-to-energy solutions to reduce emissions from waste disposal

A case study focused on Bristol Temple Meads (BTM) station provides valuable insights. The research project "Identifying challenges and opportunities in decarbonising UK train stations" that I lead at NZIIC, in collaboration with CPC, evaluated different decarbonisation options, considering both their environmental impact and cost-effectiveness.

Cost per ton of CO₂ saved: a crucial metric

The cost per ton of CO₂ saved is an essential factor in prioritising investments. This metric allows decision-makers to compare the efficiency of different interventions in reducing emissions relative to their costs.

For instance, our research found that fabric improvements like triple glazing and ceiling insulation at BTM could cost around €55,000 per ton of CO₂ avoided - much higher than figures reported for direct air capture (~€500-€1000 per ton of CO₂ avoided). Such high costs raise questions about the practicality of these interventions. "Whether that makes sense from the climate perspective or not, that's yet to be determined," I mentioned during the webinar.

By contrast, other strategies may offer lower costs per ton of CO₂ saved, providing more significant emissions reductions for the same or lower investment.

Challenges with high-cost interventions

Historical and listed buildings present unique challenges. Architectural constraints often limit the extent of modifications possible, and specialised materials or construction methods can drive up costs. Additionally, the actual emissions reductions achieved through some high-cost interventions may be relatively small compared to their expense.

Investing heavily in retrofits that yield minimal emissions reductions may not be the most effective use of resources, especially when other areas offer greater potential for impact. The opportunity cost of such investments must be considered, as funds allocated to expensive, low-impact projects are then unavailable for more effective initiatives.

Identifying high-impact investments

To maximise emissions reductions, investments should focus on areas with the highest potential impact per investment. Modernising vehicle fleets and investing in alternative fuel infrastructure offer higher returns for decarbonisation efforts. For example, transitioning from diesel to electric buses and vehicles can significantly reduce Scope 3 emissions associated with passenger and employee commuting. Notably, we can see that the transition to electrification could reduce our carbon footprint, assuming we have enough grid capacity to support this.

Investing in infrastructure that supports electric vehicles, such as charging stations, can encourage the adoption of cleaner transportation options. These investments reduce emissions and align with broader trends toward electrification in the transportation sector.

Waste management as a cost-effective strategy

Waste management is another area where cost-effective interventions can yield substantial emissions reductions. Improving recycling programs and reducing the amount of waste sent to landfills can lower emissions associated with waste disposal.

My students at Teesside University estimated that for BTM, annual waste emissions were around 5,000 kilograms of CO₂ equivalent per year. Implementing waste-to-energy or enhancing recycling rates can reduce these emissions at a relatively low cost compared to other interventions.

Despite often being overlooked, waste management enhancements are practical solutions that can be implemented without the high expenses associated with building retrofits. They offer a tangible way to reduce emissions and engage employees and passengers in sustainability efforts.

Leveraging innovation and technology

Innovative technologies can offer better returns on investment by providing efficient solutions to complex problems. The Station Innovation Zone, an initiative led by Connected Places Catapult, exemplifies how innovation can drive cost-effective decarbonisation.

For instance, one of the projects involved installing panels that extract carbon from the air, capturing emissions from diesel trains idling at the station. These panels can be converted into materials for building infrastructure like benches, creating a circular economy model. Such technologies address emissions directly and can be more cost-effective than extensive building modifications.

Another example is the use of smart sensors and energy management systems to optimise energy consumption within stations. By reducing energy waste, these technologies lower emissions and operating costs simultaneously.

Recommendations for investment prioritisation

Strategic planning is essential to ensure that investments in decarbonisation deliver the greatest possible impact. Recommendations include:

• Data-driven decision making: Utilise accurate emissions data and cost analyses to compare the effectiveness of different interventions

• Flexibility and scalability: Prioritise solutions that can be scaled up or adapted over time, allowing for adjustments as technologies evolve

• Stakeholder engagement: Involve employees, passengers, and the community in sustainability initiatives to enhance their effectiveness and acceptance

• Policy alignment: Coordinate investments with government policies and incentives to maximize financial benefits and support compliance with regulations

By focusing on interventions that offer the highest emissions reductions per dollar invested, rail industry stakeholders can make meaningful progress toward decarbonisation goals while ensuring responsible use of resources.

Conclusion

Decarbonising rail infrastructure is both an environmental imperative and an economic challenge. Prioritising cost-effective investments is crucial to maximise the impact of limited resources. By focusing on strategies that offer significant emissions reductions at lower costs—such as modernising vehicle fleets, investing in alternative fuel infrastructure, enhancing waste management, and leveraging innovative technologies—rail stations can make substantial progress toward sustainability goals.

Data-driven investment decisions, strategic planning, and stakeholder engagement are key components of effective decarbonisation efforts. While some high-cost interventions may be necessary in specific contexts, a careful analysis of cost versus benefit ensures that resources are directed where they can achieve the most significant environmental impact.

Ultimately, the long-term benefits of cost-effective decarbonisation extend beyond immediate cost savings. They contribute to a sustainable future, enhance the reputation of organisations committed to environmental stewardship, and align with global efforts to combat climate change.

This article is based on research conducted within a project that has been funded by EPSRC as part of the Innovation Launchpad Network Plus in collaboration with Connected Places Catapult.

illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.