JavaScript disabled. Please enable JavaScript to use My News, My Clippings, My Comments and user settings.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

Capital Metro project poised to deliver climate benefits of light rail to Canberra

Date

Will Steffen

For every passenger who switches from a private vehicle to light rail, trip emissions will essentially be eliminated.

For every passenger who switches from a private vehicle to light rail, trip emissions will essentially be eliminated.

While national governments struggle to agree on climate action, many cities around the world are already taking vigorous steps to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. Urban transport is one of the most important sectors for reducing emissions.

Canberra is at the forefront of this urban-oriented action on climate change.

The Capital Metro Light Rail project will be a transformative project for the Canberra-Queanbeyan urban area, bringing a wide range of economic, health, social and environmental benefits. Climate benefits can be added to that list.

Building on the ACT's rapid roll-out of renewable energy, the CMLR project will drive further significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, focusing on Canberra's transport sector.

A detailed analysis of the emission reductions that will be achieved by the CMLR, based on the first stage between the City and Gungahlin, shows the potential for major climate benefits. The numbers are impressive.

By 2020, when the first stage of the CMLR system is operational, about 2900 to 4700 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year, measured in CO2-equivalents, will be eliminated from the transport sector. This translates to an 18-30 per cent emission reduction on the City-Gungahlin corridor in 2020 compared to the business-as-usual case with no light rail.

Even more impressive are the reductions on a per-passenger basis. For every passenger who switches from a private vehicle to the light rail, emissions for the trip will essentially be eliminated.

The reason for this elimination of per-passenger emissions is clear. The light rail cars are powered by electricity, not by fossil fuels that directly emit CO2 on combustion. By 2020, the ACT will be sourcing 90 per cent of its electricity from renewable energy systems such as solar and wind, Furthermore, the ACT Government has mandated that Capital Metro source the remaining 10 per cent of electricity from renewable sources, so the electricity powering the CMLR will be entirely free of greenhouse gas emissions.

The range of 18-30 per cent of emission reductions is based on estimates of the number of Canberrans who switch from private cars to light rail – that is, on the "modal shift". As shown by experience in the US, where modal shifts are commonly towards the upper end of the 20-30 per cent range when light rail is introduced, it is likely that the light rail here will also lead to modal shifts near the upper end of the range.

The analysis is conservative in other ways, and likely underestimates the climate benefits from the light rail project. For example, the analysis is based only on the City-Gungahlin corridor itself and does not include the modal shift from private vehicles to ACTION buses or to active transport – walking and cycling – on trips that feed into the light rail route.

The experience in the Gold Coast, where the new light rail line has both attracted more passengers than predicted and increased overall bus usage in the network, supports the assessment that our analysis is conservative.

The influence of the light rail system in triggering more compact development along the corridor will yield further emission reductions, depending of course on the quality and efficiency of the built infrastructure and the behavioural patterns of its occupants.

As the light rail network is extended beyond the City-Gungahlin stage to other transit corridors in the city and the number of passengers increases further, the climate benefits will grow even more.

In short, the light rail network will eventually become the backbone of a transformed transit system – integrated with ACTION bus routes, cycleways, walking corridors and electric vehicle charging stations – that delivers an efficient, resilient, carbon-free Canberra transit system, powered by renewable energy.

Following the positive outcome of the pivotal Paris climate change conference earlier this month, the urgency to deal effectively with the climate change challenge is apparent. Cities are in the frontline in tackling this challenge.

With its outstanding climate benefits added to the long list of other benefits, the CMLR project is an excellent investment in critical urban infrastructure. It places Canberra in a leading position to show the way in decarbonising both electricity generation and transport systems.

Will Steffen is adjunct professor at the University of Canberra and theme leader in CURF (Canberra Urban and Regional Futures)

47 comments

  • Absolutely agree. The light rail project is both a transport solution and an environmental solution. It will also reduce road congestion; another source of additional carbon emissions as traffic stops and slows mile after mile. The light rail has to start somewhere and it is just that - the start of what will become the backbone of a transformed transit system for Canberra and its projected population increases to 2050.

    Commenter
    lighthouse
    Date and time
    December 16, 2015, 12:45PM
    • It's only a transport solution for those lucky enough to live along the Northbourne corridor or in central Gungahlin, and working in the City. Those of us in Tuggeranong will continue to release emissions in the daily commute. But then, Tuggeranong is easy to ignore.

      Commenter
      Mads
      Date and time
      December 16, 2015, 2:45PM
    • @Mads
      The light rail has to start somewhere. I don't doubt it will come to other parts of Canberra. The fact is that light expansion in other cities such as Minneapolis and Portland in the US extend their reach throughout the city as existing light rail demonstrates solid demand and effective transport expenditure.

      Commenter
      lighthouse
      Date and time
      December 16, 2015, 3:02PM
    • Dear Mads
      Rome wasn't built in a day.
      I support the idea - but I don't think this is the best nor the smartest route to start this concept.
      Without doubt, Stage 1 should have run from the airport through Russell to the City then ANU and on to Calvary / CIT / AIS to UC and Belconnen.
      Not because I'm in Belco, but because there are active sites with transport hubs, residential, business, tourist, health, education right the way along the route.
      All that means that it would be utilised all day everyday.
      The problem with the current route is what happens in the middle of the day??
      BUT Mads - you have to start somewhere.
      The complete network plan outlined so far do show Tuggeranong being connected.
      The London underground started with 1km of line only ... maybe with your logic Mads every other person not on that 1km should have objected. Where would they be now??

      Commenter
      SC888
      Location
      Belco
      Date and time
      December 16, 2015, 3:07PM
    • The cited analysis cited is riddled with omissions and errors. To describe four:
      1) The "headline" 4700 tons of CO2-equivalent savings assumes that 75% of existing bus commuters on the tram route do not transfer their patronage to the tram, instead deciding to stay at home, walk or perhaps ride their horse to work. This left a huge passenger shortfall which the analysis illogically assumed was filled by car drivers and passengers. Its authors must think that there is something about light-rail that is simultaneously repulsive to bus travellers and attractive to car passengers, but they cannot speculate as to what that thing is.
      2) The analysis ignores Capital Metro's own congestion data showing that delays to road traffic caused by light-rail signals and priority will cause at least an extra 290 kl of fuel usage, and hence will produce an extra 780 tons of greenhouse gas CO2 equivalents per annum
      3) The analysis ignores over 60,000 tons of CO2-equivalents Capital Metro estimates will be emitted by construction
      4) The analysis fails to consider that by 2030, most commuter vehicles are likely to be powered by electricity or will meet the much lower EU emission standards.

      A more complete analysis suggests initial annual savings of 1600 tons, which will then decline as EV's become more common, and the construction emissions will never be paid back: http://www.projectcomputing.com/resources/cacs/faq.html#ghg

      It helps to understand the authors of the analysis cited by Steffan were either employed by Capital Metro or associated with CURF, which receives substantial Government funding.

      Commenter
      KentFitch
      Location
      Nicholls
      Date and time
      December 16, 2015, 3:40PM
  • The author of the article is aware that fossil fuels are burned in order to produce the electricity that runs the trams, right? It is not carbon free unless the electricity is generated solely through wind and solar.

    Commenter
    Joe
    Date and time
    December 16, 2015, 12:58PM
    • You did read the next sentence in the article, right?

      Commenter
      Hmmm
      Date and time
      December 16, 2015, 1:23PM
  • Yeah wow, pretty low brow type of argument.
    Lets forget the worst performing emergency departments in Australia, lack of infrastructure, poor roads, no grass mowing, ancient street lights that don't meet Australian standards, poor excuse for a convention centre, a stadium which roof is reaching its maximum design life, we could go on and on.
    but yeah it will potentially, maybe help stop erratic climate into the future, which is a stretch.
    Come up with a better arguement

    Commenter
    as if
    Date and time
    December 16, 2015, 12:59PM
    • Bah, thats what i get for not reading the article properly. Disregard earlier comment.

      Commenter
      Joe
      Date and time
      December 16, 2015, 12:59PM
      • I suspect you are right Joe because the use of renewables is fungible. Sure they will claim the tram will run on renewables, but there is only so much potential to economically produce bulk renewable energy. So in likelihood the price of renewable for other uses will rise and those other users will turn back to cheap coal. Also trams are heavy and electric motors are not particularly beneficent - especially with the losses in transmission. Unless the user-ship is very high - which is unlikely in Canberra - the amount of energy used per person will be higher than a bus or even many cars. A well used bus service such as the 300 service from Belco to City will use far less energy and with the development of hybrid diesal electric buses, maintained properly, will produce relatively little pollution per person. Of course if it the tram was powered by nuclear than it might work.

        Commenter
        Peter H
        Location
        Belconnen
        Date and time
        December 16, 2015, 4:29PM

    More comments

    Comments are now closed
    Featured advertisers

    Special offers

    Credit card, savings and loan rates by Mozo