A long day on the train. Scheduled times, 4:42 Kings Cross to Edinburgh, 3:35 Edinburgh to Inverness and the final leg 3:51. Distances 631km, 181 km and 130km. Trains getting slower as I travel north.
Kings Cross to the Far North
Category: Environment
Didcot to Paddington plus ULEZ
Caught a long delayed train instead of the one that I was meant to catch so I thought I’d get to London early. But further delays due to signal issues resulted in long delays on the way into London. But got there in the end. The train was 47 mins late according to the announcements. I was only 20 mins late.
Anecdotally the ULEZ is a success. London smells better. The traffic moves more freely. Pollution has reduced in London and I wonder if the pollution outside London has reduced. Pollution rises into the atmosphere in London and then comes down in Oxfordshire. Has anyone measured this?
In last weeks election the Conservative Party made much of the ULEZ. Unfortunately the primacy of the car still exists for a lot of people and is considered a vote winner. To me health and the environment trumps-why do we still think that poisoning people is acceptable?
Don’t fly….
After the epic and throughly enjoyable train trip from the far north of Scotland to Porto I am going to continue to blog on less environmentally expensive transport. Looking at some of my trips and some big issues out there.
The trip to Porto. https://my-insight.org/2023/06/01/no-fly-zone/
Plane vs train CO2 emissions
Handily the Guardian Newspaper has published a comparison of CO2 emissions between plane and train (and car). See https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/30/carbon-emissions-from-uk-rail-travel-lower-than-previously-thought?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
The example the Guardian cited was the journey from London to Edinburgh, which is one part of the journey that I completed. 12.5kg for the train and 131kg for the plane, more than a factor of 10 difference. All the trains I travelled on we’re pretty well full, so maximum savings achieved.
From the article “The first result from RDG’s new carbon calculator confirms this figure is actually 12.5kg/CO2e – approximately half the previous estimation, and 10 times less carbon than car travel or 13 times less than the equivalent flight.” referring to trains. I am actually surprised how much better trains are than flying and cars.
Far north-Inverness-London-Woking…Farnham-Bristol…Cholsey-London-Paris-Barcelona-Madrid-Badajoz-Porto…Valladolid-Madrid-Paris-London-Edinburgh-Inverness-far north summary
Let’s answer the questions on the journey: was it practical, was it fun, did it reduce pollution? And ask some more questions. The journey started and finished in the far north of Scotland and did a small diversion to Bristol, and then travelled to Porto and back.
Was the journey practical?
Flying from the UK is a lot quicker then traveling all the way by train. It turns out that getting to Portugal is particularly difficult. There appears to be very poor rail connections between Spain and Portugal, made worse by industry action on the trains in Portugal. But the trains linking London and Paris, Paris and Barcelona, Barcelona and Madrid are very rapid. Even London to Edinburgh is fast. There is no need to fly these routes. Being able to get from London to Barcelona or Paris to Edinburgh in a day is amazing.
Travelling by train to Bristol turns out to be more practical than flying from Scotland.
Was the journey fun?
Yes, it certainly was. Traveling through France, Spain, Portugal, England, Scotland, watching the changing landscape, agriculture, seeing towns and cities, all from the comfort of a train, can’t be beaten. Meeting a whole load of different people, and chatting. Exploring cities, hunting food, this was a full on experience. Far superior to flying.
I was constrained by having to be in particular locations at the start and end of the journey, otherwise I would have spent more time on the journey. However I realised that I could have spent an extra day on the journey out. Planning and booking the travel and accommodation was challenging, but it all came together.
Does traveling by train reduce pollution compared with flying
The short answer is yes!
Which was the most cycle friendly city?
Paris has undergone a big change, loads of dedicated cycle paths. It was a joy to cycle round, with sights and atmosphere all the way. Even the drivers were good. So Paris was the top place to cycle.
Second place goes to Barcelona. Some good cycle routes but not as expansive as Paris. Cycling turned out to be great way to see the city.
Madrid did not have the clear routes of Paris and Barcelona. Twice when I stopped at traffic lights , I found that a police car was lurking just behind to me on my left. When they clocked that I spotted the police car, they the drove off, through the red light. Almost as if they they were waiting to catch me out. Unfortunately I did not get time to properly explore Madrid, which was a shame.
Fourth London. Some good dedicated routes such as Euston to Waterloo, but Paddington to St Pancras not so good. Some good views from the bike in London.
Fifth, Edinburgh, the tram lines and confusing roads letting Edinburgh down. But good sights.
Porto is beautiful, but the cobbled streets and extremely aggressive drivers bring Porto down. So Porto I have to put in at sixth.
Cycling around all the cities was a great way to sightsee. Faster than walking or public transport. Cooler as well, even in sweltering Barcelona, cycling was pleasant. And you are in amongst it all.
I have not included Badajoz in the rankings , as it is far smaller than the other the large cities. But Badajoz was great to tour by bike. What a beautiful place to visit.
The list to finish
Hotels: best value Porto, followed by Badajoz. The cheapest hotels. Badajoz had the edge on quality but had a very loud wedding happening, which negated its plus points. Worst value Oxfordshire.
Food: very expensive in the UK. Good value in France, Portugal and Spain. Struggled to find good food in Porto. Late arrival in many of my destinations and traveling by train all day that often I did not eat enough.
Most picturesque train line: the far north line in Scotland, followed by Edinburgh to Inverness. Badajoz to Entroncamento was impressive.
Firsts: so many, first time in Badajoz, Barcelona, Madrid, Porto, first time crossing France and Spain by train – each in one day, first time cycling in Paris, Barcelona, Madrid, Porto Badajoz. First time speaking in French to a Catalan on the TGV, first time attempting to speak Spanish in Spain. And so many more.
Best train- the TGV. Amazing train.
Tickets: ScotRail cheap club 50 ticket from the far north to Inverness and Edinburgh to the far north. Caledonian Sleeper Inverness to London, expensive. Local trains in SE and SW England, the routes are awkward if not going to or from London. Interrail Oxfordshire to Porto to Edinburgh with extra reservations but excluding Madrid to Barcelona. I had to get a bus from Porto to Valladolid. I will use the Interrail ticket again.
Why are (some) motorists jerks
(When commenting on social media.)
When when the topic of cycling appears in social media, whether discussing closes passes or the change in the Highway Code, there are always comments from people who appear to wholeheartedly hate cyclists, for no good reason, other than they seem to dislike the existence of cyclists. The same comments always appear.
Let’s deconstruct the comments:
“Cyclists do not pay road tax”.
Actually no one pays road tax. Car owners pay vehicle excise duty. All tax payers pay for the roads whether they have a car or not. So maybe non car owners should pay less tax?
“Cyclists are not obliged to have insurance”.
True, but the amount of damage caused by cyclist in an accident is tiny compared with a car or lorry. Cycle U.K. membership includes third party insurance.
“Cyclists are always breaking the rules – running red lights, cycling on pavements etc”
This is often cited in the discussion of close passes. But how does rule breaking by a minority of cyclists justify treating all cyclists badly. This is victim blaming. Ironically a greater proportion of drivers break rules than cyclists, just look at the routine breaking of speed limits. Have a look at https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/05/10/cyclists-break-far-fewer-road-rules-than-motorists-finds-new-video-study/?sh=d5e36564bfaa.
There is further irony in the discussion of close passes, to avoid close passes ride on the pavement, one of the things cycle haters complain about. Treat cyclists with respect and they will ride on the road.
The vulnerability of cyclists means it is in their interest to follow the road rules, jumping red lights will speed up an untimely end.
“Cyclists get in way / don’t move out of the way on single track roads / hold up traffic”
Cyclists have as much right to be on the road as other vehicles, motorists don’t feel so entitled. The amount of time a car is held up is seconds and certainly does not justify an angry shake of the fist. Ideally we are all polite and nice to each other and most cyclists are polite and nice, and will move out of the way when they can. Don’t forget the cyclists can’t always hear you with wind in their ears. Be patient, wait until it is safe and pass.
“Cyclists wear dark clothing / cycle in the dark with no lights and are difficult to see”
Yes this does happen, but not a good idea for the cyclists. This is a bit of victim blaming. Strangely even when wearing a bright yellow jacket and having flashing lights I still get close passes.
“Cyclists don’t use the cycle paths provided and block up the roads”
There is no legal obligation for cyclists to use cycle paths. Unfortunately many cycle paths in U.K. are poorly designed, not kept clean and are dangerous. The cyclists has to give way at every side road. Sometimes the route is shared with pedestrians and is too narrow. Some routes require frequent re-entries to the road, which both produces delays and is dangerous.
“Cyclists produce congestion increasing pollution”
The best way to totally remove the pollution is to remove the motorised vehicles. This would also remove the congestion as cycles take up far less space than cars. Ok, although this is totally sound in its logic, it will be seen as extreme. But even when retaining the presence of motorised vehicles, each time a large vehicle is replaced by a cycle space is freed up. And this is true both with shared road space and putting in cycle lanes. More cycles, better flow of traffic, less pollution.
In the specific incidence of complaints about ambulances being held up by congestion “due to cycle lanes”, this rather misses the point. It is the motorised vehicles causing the issue not the cyclists. Again a bit of blaming the minority. Remove the cars and lorries and the roads will instantly clear.
So drivers stop being a jerk, with your knee jerk reaction and get on a bike, be nice.
Insight 