[title]
So, it cost £18.9 billion. Hopefully this huge project will have some environmental benefits.
It should do. ‘It could move people out of cars when cycling wouldn’t be an option,’ says Helena Titheridge, professor of mobility and sustainable transport at UCL. ‘[But] over the last couple of years, the number of people travelling into London has fallen. In hindsight, it might have been better to invest in the cycle network or an outer London rail link in the suburbs, where the infrastructure is quite poor.’
How does it compare to other transport options?
Crossrail estimates it will use about 32g of CO2 per passenger-kilometre, compared to about 41g for domestic rail and 170g for single-occupancy cars. Not bad. Crossrail is powered off the National Grid, run by the government. If that used more renewable sources, that figure could be lower.
Got it. What about carbon use from construction?
‘The Elizabeth Line is going to pay back its construction carbon,’ says Rob Paris, former head of sustainability and consents at Crossrail. ‘The trains are energy-efficient, with regenerative braking. And around 99.6 percent of excavated material from the construction was beneficially reused.’ However, Titheridge says that part of this estimated carbon payback was based on moving people from diesel to electric trains, which could have happened even without Crossrail.
The verdict
For a construction project of this size, it’s a pretty impressive feat. Cycling and walking are obviously preferable transport options, but don’t worry too much. We won’t judge if you don’t fancy the 16-hour hike from Reading to Woolwich .