A low carbon transport plan for life after Covid-19

Covid-19 has led to a remarkable reduction in all forms of travel, one of the consequences of which has been a massive drop in pollution levels with clearer skies and cleaner air. It is something to be grateful for in the current health crisis. 

It also has consequences for the production of the DfT’s transport decarbonisation plan (‘Net Zero Transport Council to advise DfT on decarbonisation’ LTT 03 Apr). Such a plan is intended to show how transport can respond by 2050 to creating a net zero carbon economy. In itself this is a tall order and it will entail a major change in how, where and when we travel. Many of the measures, if they are to be effective, will have to be started immediately and will certainly need to be in place long before 2050.

The combination of Covid-19 and decarbonisation points the way to a re-think about how transport is provided and used. The ramifications from Covid-19 would suggest that major changes in travel behaviour could occur, particularly for the journeys to/from work. More flexible working and less office use could follow with implications for peak hour travel. But travel will not disappear entirely and there is now an opportunity to emphasise investment that induces more environmentally benign means of travel – particularly locally – and particularly in major towns and cities where pollution is more prevalent. The announcements in the last Budget sent rather mixed messages on that score with no increases in fuel duty, limited help for electric vehicles and a lack of focus on where and on what new transport investments should be. 

What was missing particularly, and which needs to be addressed, is a commitment to a programme of local and integrated travel improvements embracing amongst other things better pedestrian and cycling facilities, a greater use of enhanced public transport and appropriate traffic management coupled with complementary spatial development policies and plans. Such a programme should also include rail electrification projects.

Rail electrification, however, needs to be focused on where improvements can motivate and induce changes in travel habits. It should be a phased, but continuous, programme, over a number of years. Such a programme should initially concentrate on:

• urban schemes that enable diesel services to be converted into electric ones, e.g. Leeds to Bradford, Leeds to Selby and York, the Camp Hill line in Birmingham;
• infill schemes that allow for full electric services to be introduced, e.g. Reading to Basingstoke and Bristol Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads; and 
• schemes that permit railfreight to be electrified, e.g. container services between ports and inland freight terminals.

The programme must also be accompanied by a rolling stock strategy geared to be implemented as new projects are commissioned.  

Where then does that other transport announcement of 2020 fit in – HS2? The approval of HS2 Phases 1 and 2a can be viewed as complementary to the programme outlined, in that it releases capacity on the existing West Coast route for more local, inter-urban and freight services to be run. HS2 Phase 2b is more problematical, more long-term and still awaits Parliamentary approval. 

Phases 1 and 2a also provide a spine route that in time connects London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds together (if an appropriate Northern Powerhouse scheme between Manchester and Leeds can be put in place). However, such a route must be connected to local improvements with high-speed stations as city centre hubs – otherwise the local connections and access will be lost.