Blogs

The climate argument for cheap fares

Here’s a startling statistic.  Rail only accounts for 1.8% of CO2 emissions from transport in the UK.  Cars ands lorries make up 75%: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/3085/41.pdf   It should be a no-brainer for any government keen to tackle climate change:   develop a clear strategy to persuade people to switch from road to rail.

Modal shift required

The Government will point out that more people are travelling by rail than have done so for decades.  It is true.  But the ‘m’ and ‘s’ phrase is missing: modal switch.  More people are travelling by road as well.  Except in a very few areas , people are not switching from road to rail.

The Government will also say – quite correctly – that it is investing huge sums in new infrastructure.  But, in a world threatened by runaway climate change, on its own, that is not enough.  And, indeed, may be counter-productive if it just results in more travel per se.  What’s required is a significant switch from road to rail.  What’s needed is a real reduction in the number of cars on our roads.

And that’s where pricing comes in.  A clear policy of ensuring it is always cheaper for a working family to travel by train rather than by car would result in the modal shift required.

Support the Fairfail campaign

But pricing is going the other way.  Rail fares are shooting up way above inflation.  That’s why the Campaign against Climate Change is urging its supporters to get involved with the Farefail campaign:  http://www.togetherfortransport.org/farefail/.

On Valentine’s Day Farefail supporters will be giving out leaflets at scores of stations across the country to call for an end to this fares madness.  The Government argues that the higher fares are required so that the contribution of the taxpayer to the cost of the railways falls.  But in climate terms it is madness.

To tackle climate change with the deep urgency that is needed requires both investment in rail and lower fares as part of a clear policy to reduce the number of vehicles on the roads.  In the end it also makes economic sense, creating new jobs and bringing down fares even further as more people use the trains.

Put Beeching in reverse

Fifty years ago in March Dr Beeching published his now infamous report that resulted in so much of the country’s network being destroyed.  As a small boy I remember being taken to a remote station in the Scottish Highlands to jeer at Dr Beeching as he sped past in an engine surveying the rail system he was so keen to close.  That line was saved but many were axed.

I don’t expect Dr Beeching had ever heard of climate change.  Today’s decision-makers most certainly have.  To help tackle it requires putting Beeching into reverse gear.

Don't mention climate change

I heard the other day that before a Greenpeace street action, campaigners were told by the organiser “Don’t mention climate change”. This was apparently because, according to the organiser, “The Public are not interested in climate change”.  This latter might be true and one can understand the organiser’s reasoning  – but it does rather raise the question of what Greenpeace – and indeed the broader Green movement – exists for, anyway.

Funny weather we’re having... how the melting Arctic is affecting global weather patterns in a sinister way

There was a time, not long ago, when ‘global warming’, or ‘climate change’ as it became more frequently labelled, was purely a theoretical construct, a thing of the future. Disturbing, spine-chilling even, for those who understood it, it was still something quite remote, something that had to be constructed out of scientific principles which only quite a concentrated effort of intellect and imagination could convert into meaningful consequences – and those a safeish distance away, in the future.

Pages