High speed rail could be so much better

[tornado]

Common sense from a politician on the HS2 proposals? She wants 100% electrification of the network instead. Personally, I agree with many of her points.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/04/hs2-high-speed-rail

(The article is by Caroline Lucas - a Green Party MP for those who might not know)

 

[Metroland]

The principal parts of the rail network should be electrified anyway, especially as were now about to go into a world of permanently high oil and commodity prices.

Some of these are fair points, I'm not sure about this idea of 'ripping up vast amounts of countryside', because that just isn't true.

The Greens have to be careful about objecting to all transport construction because it leaves the impression they don't want people to travel. Moreover there are practical realities of home working, and the internet is extremely 'ungreen' in terms of the amounts of energy and materials it uses - some precious metals quite unsustainably.

We do actually need something quite radical, perhaps multiple more times more mind blowing that the HSR projects because were moving into a very different world, where business as usual is not really going to be on the cards.

 

[The Barlow Boy]

Ah the Greens, those airy-fairy people who think that wind turbines can supply all of our electrical needs. Excellent idea to electrify the entire network Caroline but where are you going to get all of that electrickery from? You don't want coal fired stations because that produces too much carbon(that'll be the carbon that's locked into the coal which originated from, er, the atmosphere all of those squillions of years ago). Then there's nuclear powered stations. No, you don't want those either because, well, it's nuclear isn't it? That leaves wind turbines and wave power. So when it's calm and there's no wind and waves.......
"First Great Central West East Coast trains apologises for the cancellation of your services this morning, there's no electricity to power them because the turbines aren't turning due to a lack of wind".

Meanwhile in France the nuclear supplied electrical network continues to ensure a reliable supply for their fleet of nationalised trains.

 

[route:oxford]

As usual, the Greens, in this case Carolwhine is focussed on the Home Counties. "Think about the Chilterns!!!!", when HS2 is finished the intention is for it to reach Edinburgh/Glasgow.

 

[WatcherZero]

No intention official or unofficial for it to reach Scotland yet.

 

[tbtc]

All sounds nice, and I hope that we get electrification on other lines too (MML being a priority), but wiring other lines won't provide additional capacity on the WCML where it will be needed in the next generation - wiring the GWML/MML etc is a whole separate issue.

We want a transport system driven by social justice

Can anyone translate that into English?

 

[142094]

Meanwhile in France the nuclear supplied electrical network continues to ensure a reliable supply for their fleet of nationalised trains.

Really? Didn't they have a massive problem last year with some of their reactors out for summer maintenance and then a few more went down, ending up having to import electricity from the UK and other neighbouring countries?

 

[tornado]

What about her other point "We want strong city regions with highly integrated transport systems...stretching for at least 50km around all our major cities. We want excellent inter-city links between places like Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle and Exeter, Bristol, Birmingham." ?

I think this should all be done *before* HS2. These are the routes used by people most of the time (i.e. commuters). Hardly anyone is travelling up and down the WCML every day. It's a disgrace that it takes 55 minutes to travel from Manchester to Leeds - a distance of 39 miles!

We want a transport system driven by social justice
Can anyone translate that into English?

Poor people can afford to travel I guess.

 

[The Barlow Boy]

Really? Didn't they have a massive problem last year with some of their reactors out for summer maintenance and then a few more went down, ending up having to import electricity from the UK and other neighbouring countries?

'tis true, but those neighbouring countries weren't getting their electrickery from windmills and waves.

 

[tbtc]

Poor people can afford to travel I guess.

You're probably right, but I wish politicians would use words like "cheap" or "affordable". Its just a train line, its not going to achieve "social justice" - she makes it sound like Judge Dredd... :roll:

 

[bluenoxid]

We want excellent rural public transport so that there is a real choice between the car and its alternatives. We want a transport system driven by social justice and fairness, providing high quality choices to all income groups and all localities. HS2 is a rich person's railway with an assumption that 30% of its passengers will earn more than £70,000 a year and, as such, seems to me to be a socially regressive project.

You must put it into context and allowing everyone to have an option regardless of personal situation and earnings is what they expect.

She doesn't demand electrification, she makes it clear that it should be put against that option of High Speed Rail.

When you consider the options on the Leeds - Manchester corridor and the speed improvements that could be made, 55 minutes is not a ridiculous journey time. It could be improved but very little could be done to push it below 50 minutes without major infrastructure works.

 

[tornado]

The thing is journeys like Manchester-London are already quicker than flying centre-to-centre and a lot quicker than driving.
Wouldn't it be better to invest the billions in:
a) quicker intercity routes like Bristol-Exeter and Manchester-Leeds (current avg. speed = 42mph)
b) reconnecting towns cut by Beeching which have now grown large enough (pop >15000) to make rail links economically feasible

The reason people still make so many trips by car is not always down to tickets being too expensive/slow trains/poor timetables. It's because they don't have convenient access to the rail network

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecting_Communities:_Expanding_Access_to_the_Rail_Network

 

[route:oxford]

The reason people still make so many trips by car is not always down to tickets being too expensive/slow trains/poor timetables. It's because they don't have convenient access to the rail network.

And are often prevented from being provided with convenient access to the rail network by "green" policies.

Where I am in Oxford, it would be is more convenient to drive to Diddyland or Haddenham to pick up a train, however the local authorities and various "campaigners" do all they can to inhibit travel on the roads to discourage "rat-runners" from diverting off the A34 or A40 on their travels to Oxford.

 

[Zoe]

The reason people still make so many trips by car is not always down to tickets being too expensive/slow trains/poor timetables. It's because they don't have convenient access to the rail network

I know of quite a fe people that would travel by train more if the cost of walk-on fares was more reasonable. The car gives them a level of flexibility that the railways does not at this time.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I know of quite a fe people that would travel by train more if the cost of walk-on fares was more reasonable. The car gives them a level of flexibility that the railways does not at this time.

Cars have always given people more flexibility than trains. It's never going to change. I can hop in a car and go anywhere at any time I like. You simply can't do that on trains. So whatever happens on the railway 'at this time' is not going to change!

 

[moggie]

Classic politician double talk. So the Greens 'support High Speed Rail' so how the hell are they ever going to get this without committing to the inevitable enormous costs of providing the infrastucture wherever that may be which will last the country generation? No they or any other political party can't so can they please stop pretending there is a cheaper and realistic alternative.

The only cheap alternative is to do nothing (which could well happen) or spend millions on numerous futile appraisal studies and reports and then do nothing.

A massive spend could of course be carried out in a patch and mend approach to improve the existing network (which will in any case be required) but this will not lead to the big picture of modal shift and creation of increased economic activity High Speed Rail is designed to achieve, as well as increasing capacity of the Rail Network as a whole.

I find it incredible that with the recent experience of WCRM route mod behind us and the impact on users that these modernisation works have, Reading being another example, opponents of the HS2 project still persist in simplifying the effort needed to make large scale alterations to exiting infrastructure - mostly out of ignorance of what is involved I suspect. This includes electrification work which is far more than putting up the poles and knitting. Therefore whatever route is chosen for HS Rail we either accept there is an unnavoidable environmental impact on the line of route and manage the scope of the imapact or persist with the status quo.

In so far as the attempts to play down the economic benefits of the HS2 project, which I agree will contribute little to those leafy area where the HS2 line passes through, however anybody who has seen the increase in the size of dormitory towns surrounding our principal cities with good classic rail connections will not find it hard to imagine the effect that will be had once that town is within 30 min drive / local rail connection from the nearest HS station and less than 1 to 1.5hrs from central London. The positive effect should also have a reverse flow in terms of attraction.

So - once again we have a politician playing to the public gallery in the knowledge that they are very unlikley to ever carry the responibility of implementation. Perhaps the Greens should also explain how prevarication on the issue in itself has significant negative environmental imapact in the maintenance of the current long distance transport modes.

I applaud the politicians trying to push HS2 forward. I have no particular wish to see our green and pleasant land carved up but it is my view that Rail is the most environmentally freindly method of transport available (I rarely fly but do not camp out in protest at those people from the shire counties flying overhead my home to their business meetings or weekend away). The shear timesale of the project means that we are going to need numerous politicians from accross the political spectrum to show equal amounts of conviction in the face of loud opposition for some time to come.

I fear another APT / Nimrod MR4 moment at some time unfortunately but just for a change can we as nation Just Get On With It!!!!

 

[Zoe]

Cars have always given people more flexibility than trains. It's never going to change. I can hop in a car and go anywhere at any time I like. You simply can't do that on trains. So whatever happens on the railway 'at this time' is not going to change!

But you used to be able to get a fair amount of flexibilty on trains without having to pay through the roof for it.

 

[Chafford1]

Classic politician double talk. So the Greens 'support High Speed Rail' so how the hell are they ever going to get this without committing to the inevitable enormous costs of providing the infrastucture wherever that may be which will last the country generation?

Possibly by adopting the HS2 Action Alliance's approach - an upgraded WCML (as per rail package 2 in the Atkins Alternatives Study), possible lengthening to 12 coaches, reduction in 1st class carriages, introduction of ERTMS for 140mph running.

An interesting report well worth a read:

http://www.hs2actionalliance.org/powercms//files/cms_files/Alternatives 1_2(1).pdf

 

[Zoe]

Also you could upgrade to ECML, four tracking at Welwyn and from Huntingdon to Peterborough would give four tracks all the way from King's Cross to Stoke Summit. Again ERTMS could be installed to allow higher line speeds.

 

[RichW1]

ERTMS is going in anyway post 2020 I believe? But this is all additional money and a seperate project. This is not an 'either or' situation. High speed rail will be financed in a different way to the existing budgets which will still go on conventional rail in line with RUS's. This will all be dependent on the over all pots of money in government at that given time.

 

[Zoe]

ERTMS is going in anyway post 2020 I believe? But this is all additional money and a seperate project. This is not an 'either or' situation. High speed rail will be financed in a different way to the existing budgets which will still go on conventional rail in line with RUS's. This will all be dependent on the over all pots of money in government at that given time.

Considering how much we keep hearing about the fact that we are in the age of austerity, there really isn't that much money to go throwing around.

 

[RichW1]

Considering how much we keep hearing about the fact that we are in the age of austerity, there really isn't that much money to go throwing around.

Entirely true but don't forget that there'll be much private finance going into this with a payback over 30years or more. Add to that, that the only costs now will be associated with the consultation and planning which is obviously still quite a lot of money. Not a penny will be spent on materials until well into the next parliament if it goes ahead.

It also appears that the government is taking the correct position in my view, that if you are to spend on anything, it should be on preparing infrastructure that will stimulate growth as overseas and nationally people have confidence and invest in UK plc because they are making the decisions that will give us a stronger infrastructure. We can build growth so we get revenues in from new business to spend on all those important things like education and health! Rail transport will increasingly be our backbone upon which everything else depends, so no backbone, no income with which to pay for perceived more important things like health already mentioned.

I think we need this more than anything for economic stimulus. Do not forget how much projects like this are perceived abroad. The railways allowed economic growth on a massive scale first time round, this time they have the ability to undertake a revolution economically for the north and to provide deseperately needed capacity for freight growth and regional passenger on the conventional network.

I'm all in on this because of the state the country's in, not in spite it! We will be hailing this when it happens.

 

[Zoe]

Entirely true but don't forget that there'll be much private finance going into this with a payback over 30years or more. Add to that, that the only costs now will be associated with the consultation and planning which is obviously still quite a lot of money. Not a penny will be spent on materials until well into the next parliament if it goes ahead.

This is all very well but the fact that it will be funded by private finance will result in the companies expecting a return. If it ends up the the fares are so high that only the rich can afford to travel on it then it could turn into a white elephant. It may well be the intention to etend north of Birmingham but in this country there seems to be a tradition of doing things piecemeal so it's possible that the line will be built from London to Birmingham and then not extended.

 

[RichW1]

I agree with the not extending thing - I hate to say it but this could be a real possibility but I'l stay positive for now (or try!) Have no doubts, I promise you, when this is up and running, it will be fully loaded as Eurostar is now no question with all the destinations it'll be serving. My two BIG concerns are....

1) It'll be a book only service like most high speed lines are in Europe now (highly inconvenient and annoying having to plan ahead when at times we can't or don't want to

2) They'll make it 2 tracks to Birmingham meaning they want to remove all major destinations from the WCML, Midland, Leeds on the ECML and place them all onto 2 tracks in the future...no chance imho! Even at 3minute headways all that traffic will not be future-proof on 2 lines. The french already have a problem serving Lyon from Paris and Lyon is a small city with just about 2 million people - so imagine that scaled up to 17million people surrounding the Peak National Park to London....I see trouble in paradise.

 

[Zoe]

If HS2 is so good then why didn't they build it ten years ago rather than throwing money at the WCML for an upgrade that wasn't even completed.

 

[RichW1]

If HS2 is so good then why didn't they build it ten years ago rather than throwing money at the WCML for an upgrade that wasn't even completed.

Because even as WCML modernisation was being planned, there was no appetite in this country politically for high-speed rail long before they realised rail would be as popular as it is. I have long-argued the railways would fill up and every country in the world with high-speed rail couldn't be wrong. The WCML upgrade had to happen even with high-speed 2 as well, it was such a mess and capacity of the future that will be needed on the conventional network could still not be provided for the the mess the WCML was before modernisation. I agree with you though, it wasn't completed and will have to be so over the next decade or so incrementally.

High-speed rail has never until recently had the ear of our politicians and not very cleverly in my view. Remember the 80's? (I was only young but I remember clearly) rail of any sort was not popular with the government or any government for that matter since the war.

WCML was necessary but so too will high speed rail be. It's like the arguments about high-speed rail and Heathrow....the inconvenient truth is we'll need both as one is not a total substitute for the other runway. The figures of use and rising figures are astonishing. It really is build or at least plan now, or regret later as new companies see more modern infrastructure and an easier life elsewhere. There's never been a time like this since the 30's in terms of construction and infrastructure requirements essential to our well-being and future economy.

 

[Zoe]

WCML was necessary but so too will high speed rail be. It's like the arguments about high-speed rail and Heathrow....the inconvenient truth is we'll need both as one is not a total substitute for the other runway.

Not if domsetic flights are taxed out of existance. Also if people travel less than it won't be needed.

 

[moggie]

Possibly by adopting the HS2 Action Alliance's approach - an upgraded WCML (as per rail package 2 in the Atkins Alternatives Study), possible lengthening to 12 coaches, reduction in 1st class carriages, introduction of ERTMS for 140mph running.]

And there you have it - classic over simplification based on ignorance. Have you any idea what this will involve to implement on a multi tracked multi user complex layout in the UK? If so perhaps you could share that with the UK supply industry. The politics of ERTMS alone will be a nightmare balancing the commercial implications between those TOC's / FOC's that do and those that doen't need cab signalling let alone the technical knowhow at industry level to implement it. Why has it taken a small dedicated team so long to implement the Cambrian Line ERTMS? It will take far longer and throw up all sorts of 'unknown unknowns' for the first complex mainline application in the UK. Time = money = equals disruption. Sure, at some point you will get there but the engineering capacity to implement ERTMS on a network wide basis is extremely limited so this should not be seen as the naidir for anti HS2 proponents. I suppose they do have till 2032 to find out.

All INHO of course.

 

[RichW1]

Not if domsetic flights are taxed out of existance. Also if people travel less than it won't be needed.

Those are certainly if's that won't happen though. The world is only going to get busier and you won't really stop it, just mitigate it. The realistic thing to do is to go greener over time in doing it.

 

[Zoe]

Those are certainly if's that won't happen though. The world is only going to get busier and you won't really stop it, just mitigate it. The realistic thing to do is to go greener over time in doing it.

Once HS2 is built there will be no good reason for domestic flights to exist.