美国部分地区正在规划修建高速铁路，以缓解严重的公路拥堵和空中交通压力。一些地区的大部分民众支持这项方案，加利福尼亚州就是其中之一。在投资相同的情况下，相比以往的坐汽车，飞机，火车旅行的方式，在圣·迭戈，洛杉矶，旧金山和萨克拉门托一线投资修建高速铁路似乎能节省跟过来往这些邻近城市的时间，花费还更少。
Now researchers from the University of California Berkeley, US, have analysed the environmental impact of the proposed high-speed rail system, taking into account not just greenhouse-gas emissions from its operation but also those created during its entire lifecycle, including processes such as manufacturing the train carriages; creating stations; laying track; forming cuttings and bridges; maintaining the system; and generating the electricity required.
来自加州大学伯克利分校的研究人员对规划的高速铁路系统进行了评估，以分析其对环境的影响。他们不光将高速列车运行过程中所排放的温室气体对环境的影响考虑在内，还把建立整个高速铁路系统的所有因素都归纳到了一起，这些过程包括制造火车车厢，修建沿途站点，铺设铁轨，修建桥梁和隧道，养护铁路，获得所需电力等等。
\"We thought it was important that total energy and emissions accounting be presented for decision and policy makers,\" Mikhail Chester told environmentalresearchweb. \"We think it is important that high-speed rail and the modes it will compete with be evaluated with a comprehensive environmental inventory that includes all vehicle, infrastructure and fuel components that are required to facilitate the vehicles in operation.\"
米哈伊尔·切斯特告诉environmentalresearchweb组织：“我们认为，向政策的制定者们提交决定当下总的能源需求和排放核算是相当重要的。高速列车在和其他交通方式竞争的同时，还应该有一份完整的报告清单，这份清单应对高速铁路系统中的所有列车，基础设施和使列车运行的燃料组件进行环境影响评估。
The team compared the lifecycle emissions of high-speed electric rail with transport by car, by heavy rail (the Amtrak diesel system) and by air. At the moment around 90% of trips in the California corridor are made by automobile while 9% are made by air and 1% by heavy rail. The equivalent figures for passenger kilometres are 75% by automobile, 24% by air and 1% by heavy rail.
研究小组将高速列车同汽车，火车（美国的全国铁路乘客公司的柴油机车）以及飞机的排放周期进行了比较。当前，有90%的人都选择汽车作为工具在加州主要城市之间来往，9%的人选择飞机，只有1%的人选择坐火车。而乘客旅行里程数的等效数据是：汽车：75%，飞机：24%，火车：1%。
For the high-speed rail system, the team assumed a total of 86 trains based on the German ICE train, consuming 170 kW/h per vehicle and using California\'s current mix of electricity sources, along with 25 stations and 1100 km of two-way track.
研究小组假设，在高速铁路系统中，有86列德国制造的城际特快列车运行，速度是每小时170公里，使用加利福尼亚州目前的混合电力，沿途设有25个站点，铺设1100公里的铁轨。
\"Energy consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions increase by 15% to 40% [for high-speed rail] from evaluating the \'tailpipe\' (vehicle propulsion) component,\" said Chester. \"Carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds and particulate matter emitted from infrastructure construction are larger than those emitted from vehicle propulsion when normalized per passenger kilometre. Additionally, by looking at low- and high-passenger occupancy scenarios, we show that high-speed rail is not universally better or worse than the other modes.\"
切斯特说：“根据‘尾管’（列车推进）组件的测算，（高速列车的运行）使能源消耗和温室气体的排放量提高到了40%，比原来增加了15%”。一氧化碳，各种挥发性的有机化合物以及来自基础建设过程中的颗粒物排放量都要比其他运输方式产生的排放量要多。而且，在观察了不同的载客情况后，我们认为，高速列车相比其他交通方式的好坏不能一概而论。
The trains are likely to have between 650 and 1200 seats; the use of small trains with higher frequency or larger trains operating less frequently could well affect passenger numbers. For the purposes of the study, the team set low occupancy as 120 passengers (10% of the capacity of the longest trains), and the high as 1200 passengers (a full train). When it came to end-use energy consumption, a high-speed rail train with 1011 passengers was equivalent to a car with five passengers.
高速列车座位数在650到1200座不等，列车根据载客量多少运行（载客量较少的列车发车间隔较短，载客量较大的列车发车间隔较长）可有效影响客流量。为了得出研究结果，研究小组设定了一列载客120人的列车（载客量为荷载量1200人的10%）和一列载客1200人的列车（满载）。测试列车运行到终点的时候，一列载有1011名旅客的高速列车的能源消耗仅与一辆乘坐5人的汽车相当。
\"It is necessary to consider modes at their best and worst ridership levels to understand the potential of the system,\" said Chester. \"While at the average one mode may be better or worse than another, this may not always be the case and by considering the different utilizations a different set of policies may be drawn to reduce the environmental burdens of a mode, for example, increasing ridership in the off-peak instead of encouraging people to switch to another mode.\"
切斯特说：“考虑到每种交通方式的最佳和最差载客水平是很有必要的，这有助于了解这种交通方式的潜力。当某一种交通方式的平均载客水平相对于其他交通方式较佳/较差时，事实却可能并非如此，因为某种交通方式中，可能运用了一些不同寻常的设施和政策，以减少环境负担。举例来说，鼓励乘客错峰出行，而不是鼓励乘客选择其他的交通方式。”
The researchers discovered that while high-speed rail may lower energy consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions per trip, the current electricity mix in California means that it can create more sulphur dioxide emissions, leading to environmental acidification and human health issues.
研究人员还发现，高速列车可能在运行过程中能源消耗和温室气体排放较少，但使用加州目前的混合电力意味着会排放更多的二氧化硫，这可能导致环境酸化和健康问题。
In a study last year, Chester and colleagues found that including lifecycle factors boosted the emissions of train transport by 155% on average. This paper examined commuter rail including heavy rail electric metro, heavy rail diesel commuter transit, and light rail transit (LRT) but not high-speed electric rail for long distances. For cars and buses the equivalent figure was 63% and for air transport, which has relatively little infrastructure for the distances travelled, it was 31%.
在2010年的一项研究中，切斯特和他的同事们发现，包括生命因素在内，火车交通的排放量平均提高了155%。他们的报告中涵盖了除长距离高速列车以外的重型电动列车，柴油通勤机车以及轻型轨道交通。而汽车和巴士的等效数据为63%，用于长距离旅行但基础设施相对较少的飞机，在排放量上只增加了31%。
Now the team plans to continue evaluating the high-speed rail system once decisions are made for system design, vehicle choice and clean energy options. \"We\'d like to identify the steps that policy and decision makers should take in developing high-speed rail systems to minimize their environmental burdens by considering appropriate transit integration to increase ridership, vehicle design selection to operate appropriate-sized trains, and the potential of integrating cleaner sources of energy,\" said Chester.
现在，研究小组打算在政府决定了系统设计，列车购买和清洁能源的选择之后继续对高速铁路系统进行评估。切斯特说：“我们希望能一步一步来，政府在制定决策的时候，应该考虑到交通体系的一体化，这样就能提高运力；同时在选择列车方面下工夫，以购买到合适载客量的列车；还要考虑到整合清洁能源的发展潜力。这样，在政府在参与高速铁路系统发展的同时，也能尽量减小产生的环境负担。”
The researchers reported their work in ERL.
研究人员将研究结果报告给了ERL（即environmentalresearchweb）。
联系客服
