Efforts are underway to implement a driverless magnetic train system in Berlin, designed to traverse the city and transport both passengers and goods. This initiative is part of the local government’s strategy to enhance the green reputation of the German capital.
However, environmentalists have criticized the proposals, refuting Christian Democrats’ (CDU) assertion that the trains were futuristic and instead labeling them as costly, energy-intensive, and frivolous.
Proposed by the newly established conservative-led government, the project is reported to have significant political support and is touted by its advocates as a crucial step towards Berlin’s aim to achieve net-zero status by 2045.
According to Dirk Stettner, the parliamentary faction leader of the CDU, a pilot stretch of magnetic levitated railway (maglev) spanning 5-7km could be operational within two years, with an estimated cost ranging from €80m to €85m (£70m-£74m).
Stettner highlighted the benefits of a magnetic train over the current extensive underground and overground networks.
During a period when Berlin’s transport company, the BVG, faced a driver shortage, resulting in a roughly 7% reduction in its timetable, Stettner highlighted the train’s self-driving capability.
He also pointed out that it offers cost and construction advantages over an underground line.
Ute Bonde, the head of the VBB transport network connecting the neighboring federal states of Berlin and Brandenburg, expressed her endorsement of the proposal.
She emphasized that Berlin, still heavily reliant on cars, requires innovative strategies to encourage people to shift from cars to trains.
“This could be a useful extension to the existing railways in the city. It is quiet, cheaper and could be constructed as either an elevated or a low-level train, and could be run on solar power,” she told RBB24 radio station.
However, environmentalists have raised doubts about the claim that the construction of the M-Bahn would enhance climate protection.
Instead, they advocate for the expansion of the already extensive infrastructure, including overground and underground trains, trams, and buses.
Tilmann Heuser, representing the Association for Environmental and Nature Protection, deemed the idea a “mockery for everyone who is serious about swiftly improving climate action” and emphasized that financing such absurd projects should not be a goal.
Heuser urged a more meticulously planned allocation of climate funds.
“The climate crisis is too much of a threat for us to play with it as if it was an excuse for a bit of fun. Fantasy projects made out of concrete will do nothing to contribute to climate protection goals,” he said.
