Budget 2020 - Anything for Rail?

[ashkeba]

That's right. I always think of him when I drive on the M42.

Keep both hands on the wheel!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Cottam Parkway station being confirmed is pretty big for the local area - and much needed, given the poor performance of buses in the area

The Wiki article about this is very vague as to its location and suggests it might replace Salwick station (which very few trains stop at).
It doesn't look to be "shovel ready".

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Personally they should have put alcohol prices up in shops but agree they should (and have done) leave pub prices alone.

Pubs will also benefit from business rates relief for 12 months unlikely to feed into price reduction but at least keeps them solvent

 

[LancasterRed]

The Wiki article about this is very vague as to its location and suggests it might replace Salwick station (which very few trains stop at).
It doesn't look to be "shovel ready".

There's only two places it can realistically go. On the bridge by the turning circle, which would require a redevelopment of the park area and re-routing of the Guild Wheel, or on the old Lea Road site which makes less sense as it doesn't serve the sports arena.

But at least it is almost certainly happening now, confirmed in the LEP: https://www.lep.co.uk/lifestyle/tra...rt-out-transport-issues-todays-budget-2447161

But in the end the Government only committed less than a quarter of that, with £25m of the funding earmarked for the Cottam Parkway station on the Preston to Blackpool line.

 

[30907]

I suspect you're right, although it is a crying shame for several reasons.

I suspect that the main reason it's not with us today is Western Region antipathy to a former Southern Region line.

Erm, half of it was GWR (as far as Boscarne Jn).

 

[Mikey C]

Road/rail infrastructure numbers are heavily skewed by major programmes, in the South East the 2 major road schemes the Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames crossing are both massively expensive, but will actually deliver comparatively few extra miles of road, it's not as if the government is building a new M3 or M11.

 

[The Ham]

But with more and more zero emission vehicles, which will only increase, then in the long term emissions will be reduced.

While that's true, the emissions by those people traveling by bus or train would be lower still. As not only does rail have like for like lower emissions (i.e. diesel train Vs diesel car) it also has OHLE which is more efficient than batteries which road transport doesn't.

 

[The Ham]

Yes, because long term government policy is claimed to be to move people off fossil oil and to electric preferably renewables. Increasing the cost of fossil oil to make us move sooner and get a competitive and environmental advantage is a key part of that and delaying it is crude populism and writing cheques that future governments will have to cash.

Indeed the would have been a small increase (say 1p per litre) with an announcement that as electric cars become more prevalent that the increases would then step up more.

Then announce that a third of the expected increase be put towards improving local buses and a further third be used in enhancing cycling infrastructure.

In doing so it would:
- improve the numbers switching to electric cars
- improve the numbers switching to buses
- improving the numbers cycling

This would then mean that they wouldn't have to spend so much on road schemes as congestion would likely reduce.

The other thing to condor is that any new/extra roads will add to the circa 330,000 tonnes of CO2e emissions each year from the maintenance of the existing strategic road network.

 

[yorksrob]

Erm, half of it was GWR (as far as Boscarne Jn).

I think half is stretching it a bit. Maybe a quarter.

Padstow and Wadebridge were definitely Southern territory.

 

[hwl]

Although I didn’t see the Budget, the local rag is reporting funding has been approved for the redevelopment of Darlington station: https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/n...on-railway-station-redevelopment-will-funded/

Most rail stuff will be seen in the spending review this summer.

 

[AndrewE]

That logic would only hold if no-one drove any additional journeys because of the improvements. But that's not what happens. It's been shown time and time again that when you improve roads to remove a bottleneck, the released road capacity almost invariably simply fills up with additional car journeys: Some people will swap from train to car because the car has become a bit quicker. Some will make additional journeys. The result is more emissions, and very likely a new bottleneck somewhere else. It is extremely unlikely that these road improvements will reduce emissions once you take into account those effects.../snip/

Yes, because long term government policy is claimed to be to move people off fossil oil and to electric preferably renewables. Increasing the cost of fossil oil to make us move sooner and get a competitive and environmental advantage is a key part of that and delaying it is crude populism and writing cheques that future governments will have to cash.

These sentiments and mine are picked up in a Guardian article today: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/11/road-to-hell-budget-tarmacs-over-climate-ambition says

The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and in his budget the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, headed off down the motorway towards climate catastrophe, all the while proclaiming his intention to protect the environment.
“Over £27bn of tarmac,” he announced, for 4,000 miles of major new roads. In stark contrast, low-carbon transport was put in the slow lane, getting £1bn.
Worse, Sunak flunked a golden opportunity to end the decade-long freeze on fuel duty that has pushed up traffic and pollution and suppressed bus and train travel. The oil price is now plummeting; even if the duty had been raised, drivers might not have seen any change in the price at the pump.

Transport emissions are now the biggest contributor to the UK’s carbon emissions and they are rising; 90% come from the roads.

Emissions from transport are a key reason the government is on track to miss its own legally binding carbon targets.

and also goes on to discuss the lack of action on building energy efficiency and other areas too.

 

[A0]

As usual, I see the government has gone with populist measures on transport and infrastructure in the budget. Fuel duty still frozen and "£27bn on over 4,000 miles of roads", "the biggest ever investment in strategic roads and motorways"

Climate crisis anyone?

By the time most of these roads get built - think 10 years - then the uptake of electric cars will have led to a huge reduction in the CO2 output from private road transport. So if the push is to low emission / zero emission cars at the same time, why shouldn't there be investment in road capacity? Unless you believe in using congestion to force people to travel how you think they should.

 

[AndrewE]

By the time most of these roads get built - think 10 years - then the uptake of electric cars will have led to a huge reduction in the CO2 output from private road transport. So if the push is to low emission / zero emission cars at the same time, why shouldn't there be investment in road capacity? Unless you believe in using congestion to force people to travel how you think they should.

because electric cars don't reduce energy use, or congestion. Making and maintaining them is energy-inefficient too. A massive change to public transport is needed.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Can anyone produce a link to where these ‘4,000 miles of major new roads’ are actually going to be built?

Apart from the new Thames crossing, which obviously hasn’t existed before, the other significant schemes seem to comprise (re-)announcements of plans to dual remaining single carriageway sections of the A46, A66, bits in Cornwall and past Stonehenge (as examples), improve junctions, etc. These would seem to be attractive on safety grounds as well as helping keep traffic moving.

 

[Domeyhead]

Erm, half of it was GWR (as far as Boscarne Jn).

If we're talking in the past tense Padstow and Wadebridge were at the end of a long SR line that branched off the Barnstaple line and proceeded through Okehampton and Halwill Jcn. Trains to and from Padstow went that way rather than down to Bodmin "Parkway". Out of interest SR trains to Padstow left Exeter St Davids to the North. GWR trains destined to run past Bodmin Road (Parkway) left to the south, and never the twain met.

 

[Dai Corner]

Can anyone produce a link to where these ‘4,000 miles of major new roads’ are actually going to be built?

Apart from the new Thames crossing, which obviously hasn’t existed before, the other significant schemes seem to comprise (re-)announcements of plans to dual remaining single carriageway sections of the A46, A66, bits in Cornwall and past Stonehenge (as examples), improve junctions, etc. These would seem to be attractive on safety grounds as well as helping keep traffic moving.

I guess dualling could be considered building a new road, even if the new bit is another carriageway adjacent to the existing one? Carriageway-miles would be increased although route-miles wouldn't.

 

[gg1]

Can anyone produce a link to where these ‘4,000 miles of major new roads’ are actually going to be built?

"£27bn on over 4,000 miles of roads"

To me that does not mean 4,000 miles of new road will be built, the vast majority of this mileage is likely to be improvements to existing roads, and based on previous track records of government spending announcements, I fully expect some of this to be essential maintenance which would have happened anyway.

 

[A0]

because electric cars don't reduce energy use, or congestion. Making and maintaining them is energy-inefficient too. A massive change to public transport is needed.

Because public transport doesn't use energy ?

The complete and utter lack of flexibility is why public transport isn't the answer. It's why people chose to own their own horse back in the day, because it meant they could travel where they wanted when they wanted.

The argument about cars on here has always been "what about the pollution" - now that's being fixed the goalposts are shifting. The reality is there are no shortage of posters around here who clearly hate the concept of people being able to travel using their own personal transport and want people to be forced into using social transport regardless of the inconvenience or impracticability it causes.

 

[Wolfie]

Road/rail infrastructure numbers are heavily skewed by major programmes, in the South East the 2 major road schemes the Stonehenge tunnel and the Lower Thames crossing are both massively expensive, but will actually deliver comparatively few extra miles of road, it's not as if the government is building a new M3 or M11.

Since when is Stonehenge in the South East? Try South West!

 

[Skymonster]

As usual, I see the government has gone with populist measures on transport and infrastructure in the budget. Fuel duty still frozen and "£27bn on over 4,000 miles of roads", "the biggest ever investment in strategic roads and motorways"

Climate crisis anyone?

With HS2 projected to cost £106bn, its good to see roads getting a quarter of the investment that is going into a single rail project.

 

[ashkeba]

With HS2 projected to cost £106bn, its good to see roads getting a quarter of the investment that is going into a single rail project.

Is HS2 getting that in the 5 years that the roads amount is for I think?

 

[furnessvale]

Is HS2 getting that in the 5 years that the roads amount is for I think?

And once again, can anyone point to the price of a road scheme that includes the cost of all the vehicles destined to use that road?

 

[Mikey C]

Since when is Stonehenge in the South East? Try South West!

What I meant was that in the roads document it's part of the area covering the south of England

While the A303 improvements are to benefit the Southwest, Stonehenge itself is nearer London than Cornwall

 

[Cardiff123]

Because public transport doesn't use energy ?

The complete and utter lack of flexibility is why public transport isn't the answer. It's why people chose to own their own horse back in the day, because it meant they could travel where they wanted when they wanted.

The argument about cars on here has always been "what about the pollution" - now that's being fixed the goalposts are shifting. The reality is there are no shortage of posters around here who clearly hate the concept of people being able to travel using their own personal transport and want people to be forced into using social transport regardless of the inconvenience or impracticability it causes.

Electric cars yes will reduce pollution at street level for pedestrians, but manufacturing electric cars has a severely damaging impact on the environment. This story from a few months ago shows that the metal elements needed for the batteries for electric cars has to be mined from the deep sea bed. Once again, humans disrupting and destroying an so far untouched eco system for their own gains. And no, I'm not an eco-warrior, I just want to see a planet left with nature and wildlife for future generations.

It's obvious that the most environmentally friendly way to transport people on mass is by mass public transit systems, whether it's by trains over medium to long distances, or trams and buses over short distances. Basically, we had it right up until the 1950s/60s with railways, electric trams, and electric trolley buses as the main forms of transport. Then the 1960s and 70s happened with a massive push for petrol cars and buses and we are now paying for this mistake with a road and motorway network that is never big enough, and of course toxic levels of city centre pollution. This needs to be curbed urgently and rising fuel duty is a perfect way to discourage people out of cars and use the revenue from it to invest in public transport. But as it';s unpopular governments are terrified of doing this.

because electric cars don't reduce energy use, or congestion. Making and maintaining them is energy-inefficient too. A massive change to public transport is needed.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[A0]

It's obvious that the most environmentally friendly way to transport people on mass is by mass public transit systems, whether it's by trains over medium to long distances, or trams and buses over short distances. Basically, we had it right up until the 1950s/60s with railways, electric trams, and electric trolley buses as the main forms of transport.

We also had black and white TV with 2 channels, outside lavatories, poor healthcare and relatively low life expectancy up to the 60s then developments thereafter massively improved all of these things. Ordinarily with evolution you evolve into a better place, not regress to a place you were previously.

 

[A0]

What I meant was that in the roads document it's part of the area covering the south of England

While the A303 improvements are to benefit the Southwest, Stonehenge itself is nearer London than Cornwall

Wiltshire is classed as 'south west' as is Dorset - see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_West_England

As the A303 runs right through the middle of the eastern part of the south-west, improvements to it will benefit the south west, though it would be nice to see improvements to some of the other bits further west.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Getting back on topic... One of the few specific rail commitments Rishi Sunak made was to proceed with Cambridge South station. Does anyone know how far advanced the plans for that are? Any sense of timescales before we could start actually building the station?

 

[nlogax]

Getting back on topic... One of the few specific rail commitments Rishi Sunak made was to proceed with Cambridge South station. Does anyone know how far advanced the plans for that are? Any sense of timescales before we could start actually building the station?

Yep.. options already published, first round of consultation has already closed.

https://consultations.networkrail.co.uk/communications/cambridge-south/

"Overview
Network Rail is developing plans for a new station in the vicinity of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus to improve connectivity in Cambridgeshire and beyond."

 

[Wolfie]

Wiltshire is classed as 'south west' as is Dorset - see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_West_England

As the A303 runs right through the middle of the eastern part of the south-west, improvements to it will benefit the south west, though it would be nice to see improvements to some of the other bits further west.

Exactly

 

[The Ham]

Because public transport doesn't use energy ?

The complete and utter lack of flexibility is why public transport isn't the answer. It's why people chose to own their own horse back in the day, because it meant they could travel where they wanted when they wanted.

The argument about cars on here has always been "what about the pollution" - now that's being fixed the goalposts are shifting. The reality is there are no shortage of posters around here who clearly hate the concept of people being able to travel using their own personal transport and want people to be forced into using social transport regardless of the inconvenience or impracticability it causes.

Cars have their place, however they are generally used too much. As an example I walk my kids to school there are those whose house we walk past and see them driving their child to school and then driving back home (depending on how early or late we were running).

Cars may be starting to shift the goalposts, but we're still 5 years off from this being a valid argument for not being so concerned about their use (we're still low single digit percentages of new cars).

Even then what's the energy use between a diesel car and a diesel train? A diesel train wins in energy use, therefore an electric train would beat an electric car. However it's not a comparable case as EV's are battery powered and so a battery train is likely to out perform a battery car, whilst a battery train would be beaten by an electric train.

The other thing to consider is that we'll need to generate the electricity to power those vehicles, by using the most efficient mode then we'll not have to build so much generation.

By shifting more people away from driving then this would create better environments for us to all live in. Including overcoming the problem with pavement parking amongst others.