Decarbonizing bus and rail systems is central to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 3, 7, 9, 11, and 13. This review combines a bibliometric analysis of 616 unique records retrieved from Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore (2000 to 2025) with a structured synthesis of 20 focal studies selected through PRISMA-style screening, and places advanced biofuels, hydrogen, and synthetic fuels (e-fuels) on a common evidence footing that includes battery-electric buses as the benchmark. Hydrogen dominates the literature, whereas direct bus and rail applications of synthetic fuels remain untested. Waste-based biomethane and hydrotreated vegetable oil deliver greenhouse gas (GHG) savings of about 71 to 88 % relative to fossil references (in Turin, fleet emissions fall from 85.5 to 21.3 to 63.4 gCO2 per passenger-km), whereas crop-based pathways achieve roughly 33 to 58 % before indirect land-use change. Battery-electric buses reach 63 to 76 % lower life-cycle GHG emissions than diesel on the EU grid and up to 92 % with renewable electricity, at the lowest reported cost (EUR 0.58 to 0.91 per km in an Italian case, against EUR 1.75 to 2.15 for fuel-cell buses). Fuel-cell buses save 15 to 33 % with fossil hydrogen and up to 89 % with renewable hydrogen, while using about three times more energy per kilometre than battery buses. Synthetic fuels achieve 50 to 70 % well-to-wheel savings in hybrid heavy-duty engines but require 2 to 14 times more electricity than direct electrification. We translate this evidence into a trigger-based decision framework: battery-electric operation by default; hydrogen where long range or non-electrified rail coincides with low-emission supply; biofuels as fleet-life-bound bridging options; and e-fuels for legacy niches. The indicative sequencing (biofuels to 2030, hydrogen scale-up in 2030 to 2040, selective e-fuel use after 2040) is conditional on these triggers. Coverage gaps are substantial: no focal study examined Sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia.
