Do you think that the Nimby's will allow this on HS2

[MrJamesBrown]

On the Belgian High Speed Line they have installed Solar Panels on top of a tunnel. The tunnel was put into place to prevent trees falling onto the tracks. This section of line runs along sided the E19 from Antwerp-Breda
Link to video is here

 

[ainsworth74]

I suspect that NIMBY's will be the least of a project like that's problems. A bigger issue will be just how much does a tunnel like that cost? What benefits will it bring and over what time scale? How much power would such an installation generate and what could we use it for? Will there for instance be enough to make it worthwhile feeding into the OHLE that powers the trains? Or enough to power the stations on the line (and perhaps other nearby stations)?

 

[anthony263]

Good idea.

These HS2 nimby's i hate with a passion particulary with all the lies,wrong facts etc, although the pro HS2 has now started to get its act together.

Its the same with those nimbys who dont want the bicester town line having london trains on it, personally they should just shut up. The line was there first and they should have known that there would be a possibility that there would be a increase in trains when they purchased the house.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I suspect that NIMBY's will be the least of a project like that's problems. A bigger issue will be just how much does a tunnel like that cost? What benefits will it bring and over what time scale? How much power would such an installation generate and what could we use it for? Will there for instance be enough to make it worthwhile feeding into the OHLE that powers the trains? Or enough to power the stations on the line (and perhaps other nearby stations)?

THe article i read on that tunnel in belgium mentioned that it gives enough energy over the year to power the entire high speed network for 1 day. Which is quite a bit.
DIdnt mention price of tunnel but reduced environmental impacts of cutting down trees so maybes its something for the nimbys to consider.

 

[talltim]

What happens when the trees fall on the solar panels?

 

[YorkshireBear]

What happens when the trees fall on the solar panels?

Fair play!

 

[SS4]

What happens when the trees fall on the solar panels?

What are the chances of that happening? Then contrast it against the amount of electricity you get. The OP mentions HS2 and there aren't that many storms (the only natural event that could bring down a tree) between London and Birmingham.

 

[ainsworth74]

THe article i read on that tunnel in belgium mentioned that it gives enough energy over the year to power the entire high speed network for 1 day. Which is quite a bit.

Hmm well that certainly is interesting, any idea on cost?

 

[Squaddie]

These HS2 nimby's i hate with a passion...

Its the same with those nimbys who dont want the bicester town line having london trains on it, personally they should just shut up.

Such a mature attitude to those who may disagree with you.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Hmm well that certainly is interesting, any idea on cost?

http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2011/06/06-solar-panels-recruited-to-power.html thats the atrticle

says about 14 million

 

[Bonemaster]

Good idea.

These HS2 nimby's i hate with a passion particulary with all the lies,wrong facts etc, although the pro HS2 has now started to get its act together.

Sorry for such a long response but I must take issue with your opinion on NIMBYs, and to be fair it would have been a position I would have taken in my younger years.

The fact remains that every council, local political party and MP (government and opposition with the exception of Bob Ainsworth) around the route of HS2 opposes it. It only serves two population centres and sticks two fingers upto everyone in between, who will suffer from fewer slower rail services, both regionally and to the capital, this would leave several towns and cities on there backsides as they would struggle to attract business when Birmingham joins the high speed rail network.

The truth is that if the line does not reach Scotland the economic case is at best weak, yet without finalising the routes that will give the best economic returns first we risk being left with an expensive white elephant costing £600 for every family in the country to save 20 minutes between Birmingham and the capital, and major infrastructure projects are very exposed to long delays and cancellation depending on funding and political will.

I am actually pro HS2 in principle but whilst it cuts off population and employment centres bigger than Newcastle upon Tyne, Nottingham, or Leicester to save a few quid or a couple of minutes the plans are simply flawed, and should be planned and funding obtained for all British high speed rail in its entirety before any work starts on HS2 and the route planned properly in conjunction with local authorities, enterprise zones and other government policy.

I must also challenge your assumption that the StopHS2 campaign tells a lot of lies, be aware that the pro HS2 campaign also shows things through rose tinted spectacles at best, and the pro HS2 website encompasses a rant by someone who has changed there mind because they cant remove there name from a petition something very constructive to the argument. Both sides will tell you what they want you to see to promote there arguments

The right to oppose what is being done in our local areas is one of the things that makes our country what it is, and using words like "hate" about people who challenge the facts as they are presented by government agencies, who are using there right to protest and challenge is simply wrong, and I would ask you anthony263 to think how you would react if bulldozers turned up tomorrow to build a motorway along your back garden, or if there was going to be a high speed railway line on a 20ft embankment above the school that your children attend if its not ok to object in these circumstances. We would be in an exceptionally poor country if we was not allowed to object against things that will effect our everyday life akin to something the other side of the Iron Curtain.

To use the word NIMBY simply means that you do not understand someone elses point of view, there way of life, or the impact that changes to there local area will have on there life, the value of the property they have worked hard to buy, or the safety and well being of there children, and you forget about the WIIMBY's who are joining with the StopHS2 campaign

 

[YorkshireBear]

As always either side may rose tint figures its just what happens.

The problem is a high speed line cannot serve everywhere so where is the cut off. Yes theres town between london and birmingham that are bigger than some up north being served. But these towns can reach london quickly already whereas towns/cities in the north cannot.

 

[ainsworth74]

thats the atrticle

Thanks

 

[Bonemaster]

As always either side may rose tint figures its just what happens.

The problem is a high speed line cannot serve everywhere so where is the cut off. Yes theres town between london and birmingham that are bigger than some up north being served. But these towns can reach london quickly already whereas towns/cities in the north cannot.

Fair point however High Speed rail has to be inclusive, offer value to the money for the tax payer and assist with regional development.

Your argument that towns and cities can reach London quicker than towns in the north, shows a major flaw in the choice of Birmingham, Coventry and Birmingham are 20 odd miles apart and as such if a service to Coventry can not be justified because of its journey time to London is too quick, the entire argument for Birmingham also goes out of the window because of the similarity in journey times. We are not talking about a two bit town being cut off but one the country's largest cities being cut out of an arbitrary line. We have a once in a hundred years opportunity to connect cities and towns that need connecting so we absolutely have to get this right, to feed regeneration, and enterprise in all areas of the country, if we mess this up the consequences for millions of people could as big as the 1980s deindustrialisation and for that reason I would oppose the Leeds extension also if it did not serve the large conurbations of Wakefield and Bradford in the same go.

The benefit in High Speed rail is in reaching Scotland we should be worrying about the regional branches after that.

I believe that anthony263 silence speaks volumes after his comments yesterday.

 

[anthony263]

Fair point however High Speed rail has to be inclusive, offer value to the money for the tax payer and assist with regional development.

Your argument that towns and cities can reach London quicker than towns in the north, shows a major flaw in the choice of Birmingham, Coventry and Birmingham are 20 odd miles apart and as such if a service to Coventry can not be justified because of its journey time to London is too quick, the entire argument for Birmingham also goes out of the window because of the similarity in journey times. We are not talking about a two bit town being cut off but one the country's largest cities being cut out of an arbitrary line. We have a once in a hundred years opportunity to connect cities and towns that need connecting so we absolutely have to get this right, to feed regeneration, and enterprise in all areas of the country, if we mess this up the consequences for millions of people could as big as the 1980s deindustrialisation and for that reason I would oppose the Leeds extension also if it did not serve the large conurbations of Wakefield and Bradford in the same go.

The benefit in High Speed rail is in reaching Scotland we should be worrying about the regional branches after that.

I believe that anthony263 silence speaks volumes after his comments yesterday.

Must admit i forgot about this thread and only saw it when reading through the forum

I have been reading some of the comments on hear since my post yesterday, maybe i did go a little bit overboad, but i do get frustrated with nimbys sometimes (so i apoligise if i have upset anybody)

Been having a think about this and had a discusion with some freinds about this, personally i would like to see HS2 go to scotland. One of my freinds was saying that it is a waste o money would destroy natural enviroment, but as i said to her construction isnt exected for a few years yet and thats if it even gets the go ahead.

I would personally rather a high speed railway than a new motorway or expanded airport.

i also agree that it is needed to take some of the pressure off the other 2 north -south main lines so that some extra capacity can be used by railfreight which should take some more lorries off the uk road network.

 

[LE Greys]

I have to say that I really don't like the idea of travelling along most of the line without being able to see out of the windows, and it might persuade me to use the WCML instead. If that consideration affects even 1% of potential passengers, then that's a big dent in revenue. There must be a better way to handle it than that.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I have to say that I really don't like the idea of travelling along most of the line without being able to see out of the windows, and it might persuade me to use the WCML instead. If that consideration affects even 1% of potential passengers, then that's a big dent in revenue. There must be a better way to handle it than that.

without tunnles it wont be built though....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Fair point however High Speed rail has to be inclusive, offer value to the money for the tax payer and assist with regional development.

Your argument that towns and cities can reach London quicker than towns in the north, shows a major flaw in the choice of Birmingham, Coventry and Birmingham are 20 odd miles apart and as such if a service to Coventry can not be justified because of its journey time to London is too quick, the entire argument for Birmingham also goes out of the window because of the similarity in journey times. We are not talking about a two bit town being cut off but one the country's largest cities being cut out of an arbitrary line. We have a once in a hundred years opportunity to connect cities and towns that need connecting so we absolutely have to get this right, to feed regeneration, and enterprise in all areas of the country, if we mess this up the consequences for millions of people could as big as the 1980s deindustrialisation and for that reason I would oppose the Leeds extension also if it did not serve the large conurbations of Wakefield and Bradford in the same go.

The benefit in High Speed rail is in reaching Scotland we should be worrying about the regional branches after that.

I believe that anthony263 silence speaks volumes after his comments yesterday.

see where your coming from. I wasnt referring to birmingham, i dont see the point in the first stage only being there anyway i think its pointless it wont attract nearly enough attention or revenue.
i agree with what you say about scotland thats where the demand is. branches to everywhere considered later. My idea for high speed is tot have parkway stations with fast EMU services from cities to the station like a two tier station. So you could get 1 EMU from bradford wakefield and york and 2 or 3 from leeds all come into the station to feed into high speed.

 

[justinsteam]

The fact remains that every council, local political party and MP (government and opposition with the exception of Bob Ainsworth) around the route of HS2 opposes it. It only serves two population centres and sticks two fingers upto everyone in between, who will suffer from fewer slower rail services, both regionally and to the capital, this would leave several towns and cities on there backsides as they would struggle to attract business when Birmingham joins the high speed rail network.

The truth is that if the line does not reach Scotland the economic case is at best weak, yet without finalising the routes that will give the best economic returns first we risk being left with an expensive white elephant costing £600 for every family in the country to save 20 minutes between Birmingham and the capital, and major infrastructure projects are very exposed to long delays and cancellation depending on funding and political will.

I am actually pro HS2 in principle but whilst it cuts off population and employment centres bigger than Newcastle upon Tyne, Nottingham, or Leicester to save a few quid or a couple of minutes the plans are simply flawed, and should be planned and funding obtained for all British high speed rail in its entirety before any work starts on HS2 and the route planned properly in conjunction with local authorities, enterprise zones and other government policy.

I must also challenge your assumption that the StopHS2 campaign tells a lot of lies, be aware that the pro HS2 campaign also shows things through rose tinted spectacles at best, and the pro HS2 website encompasses a rant by someone who has changed there mind because they cant remove there name from a petition something very constructive to the argument. Both sides will tell you what they want you to see to promote there arguments

To use the word NIMBY simply means that you do not understand someone elses point of view, there way of life, or the impact that changes to there local area will have on there life, the value of the property they have worked hard to buy, or the safety and well being of there children, and you forget about the WIIMBY's who are joining with the StopHS2 campaign

There's a lot of sense in what Bonemaster is saying here.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I have to say that I really don't like the idea of travelling along most of the line without being able to see out of the windows, and it might persuade me to use the WCML instead. If that consideration affects even 1% of potential passengers, then that's a big dent in revenue. There must be a better way to handle it than that.

There is a recognised medical understanding of certain people who are affected by the matter you describe. It can lead to severe anxiety and stress related problems and has been known to bring on a panic attack. Intending users of the Channel Tunnel trains with this problem should consult their doctor before travelling.

 

[talltim]

What are the chances of that happening? Then contrast it against the amount of electricity you get. The OP mentions HS2 and there aren't that many storms (the only natural event that could bring down a tree) between London and Birmingham.

Well, the OP mentions that fact that the tunnel prevent trees falling on the line, so I was taking it to a logical humourous conclusion

 

[LE Greys]

There is a recognised medical understanding of certain people who are affected by the matter you describe. It can lead to severe anxiety and stress related problems and has been known to bring on a panic attack. Intending users of the Channel Tunnel trains with this problem should consult their doctor before travelling.

In my case, it has more to do with the fact that I would be bored stiff, but I quite understand where someone might be coming from. I've been on flights next to frightened passengers, and it must be a most uncomfortable experience.

 

[brianthegiant]

Those who are unable to travel in rail tunnels have my complete sympathy. but about 3 million people do choose to use the London Underground every day (where at least some of those journeys could also be made by bus or overground, but the tube is perceived as being more straightforward or faster).

Any new rail line into London these days is going to involve a lot of tunnelling...

I dont personally envisage this type of tree protection tunnels happening in England. The Begian tunnel is significantly less visually appealling than the cut& cover being proposed for the Chilterns HS2 section. I guess in England people are more concerned about aesthetics & less about C02 etc...

Sadly whilst there possibly would have been lots of opportunities for large scale solar PV on the railway estate, thats out of the question now the govt has scrapped the feed in tariff above 50kW. so we'll be limited to small/medium size systems a la Blackfriars.

Looks like we're also back to the argument against HS2 because it doesn't serve this town or that town. I think that fundamentally misses the point of HS2 to act as a high speed backbone for the national network from which classic services can branch off from. the WCML upgrade fiasco proves that upgrading existing lines for higher speeds is risky and doesn't offer good value (remember WCML 140mph?). so it makes more sense to build new high speed non-stop & use the classic lines for more stopping services to here there and everywhere.

 

[RichW1]

The whole point of High Speed is to connect the major central business districts that have a critical mass of people that is significant. The idea that an interCITY service should stop anywhere between London and Birmingham seems a nonsense. The route specified goes through no areas I recognise as being of any population significance whatsoever. If people choose to live in the country or where they do, they can't expect Intercity to stop for them or trains would grind to a halt because everyone wants a stop which would mean the train becomes pointless anyway.

The whole point must be to encourage and facilitate economic prowess amongst the major centres of population and commerce....and villages are simply not. I hear Coventry being brought into the conversation, but you won't find any urban geographer now that seriously believes Coventry isn't subservient to Birmingham's city centre and I hate to say it...it will never be a competitive city in its own right again because of the way cbd domination has developed through human behaviour. Inward investment in terms of the business community is going to areas of critical mass that has a lot of intelligent, flexible and creative people in abundance that it can call on and develop; Coventry will never be that place but it can be an excellent secondary place for back office work from Birmingham city centre and act as more of a suburb to it. There are excellent connections to London and when I see estate agents advertising house prices in Rugby and Coventry with relation to time into London Euston...you know it's true.

There are many places that would love to use old boundaries and nostalgia to say they're independent and should have a High-speed stop but if we start with Cov, where's next? Bradford as well as Leeds, Huddersfield as well as Leeds? At the end of the day, some places will have to fall into line and act as suburbs to what are already far larger central business districts in which most people in the area from places like Cov and Bradford and Hudds commute to anyway!

High Speed is what's needed for capacity reasons connecting our largest metro areas dominent CBD's. I don't buy this argument that places like Cov will lose out because not only do they have existing connections that are good, but many commute to Birmingham CBD anyway. As for the line only going to Birmingham...it has to start somewhere; not intended to finish there, not to mention the fact that any journey reduction to Birmingham will carry through to an extent to other destinations further north...why do anti HS2 people fail to see this?!

This argument is as much about complicated urban geography that has changed vastly from the old definitions of what is and is not a city and how it functions. HS2 should hold its line, London - Birmingham - Manchester, branching to Sheffield and Leeds from Birmingham too. London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds are the biggest CBD's and carry the most IC traffic, therefore it seems logical that this is where you want to take the strain away from the conventional network and go like hell if you're building a new line that would make Brunel proud.

 

[ivanhoe]

As much as I agree with RichW1, HS 2 has failed to state the improvements to Cities that are not going to be 100% HS. I am talking about Leicester, Nottingham in the East Midlands and say Liverpool and Newcastle. It's all about marketing to as many people as possible. The headlines always state Birmingham, Manchester Leeds when HS2 will bring HS possibilities to many more Cities. So HS 2 supporters, state your inclusive case or it will never see the light of day, in my opinion

 

[LE Greys]

The whole point of High Speed is to connect the major central business districts that have a critical mass of people that is significant. The idea that an interCITY service should stop anywhere between London and Birmingham seems a nonsense. The route specified goes through no areas I recognise as being of any population significance whatsoever. If people choose to live in the country or where they do, they can't expect Intercity to stop for them or trains would grind to a halt because everyone wants a stop which would mean the train becomes pointless anyway.

The whole point must be to encourage and facilitate economic prowess amongst the major centres of population and commerce....and villages are simply not. I hear Coventry being brought into the conversation, but you won't find any urban geographer now that seriously believes Coventry isn't subservient to Birmingham's city centre and I hate to say it...it will never be a competitive city in its own right again because of the way cbd domination has developed through human behaviour. Inward investment in terms of the business community is going to areas of critical mass that has a lot of intelligent, flexible and creative people in abundance that it can call on and develop; Coventry will never be that place but it can be an excellent secondary place for back office work from Birmingham city centre and act as more of a suburb to it. There are excellent connections to London and when I see estate agents advertising house prices in Rugby and Coventry with relation to time into London Euston...you know it's true.

There are many places that would love to use old boundaries and nostalgia to say they're independent and should have a High-speed stop but if we start with Cov, where's next? Bradford as well as Leeds, Huddersfield as well as Leeds? At the end of the day, some places will have to fall into line and act as suburbs to what are already far larger central business districts in which most people in the area from places like Cov and Bradford and Hudds commute to anyway!

High Speed is what's needed for capacity reasons connecting our largest metro areas dominent CBD's. I don't buy this argument that places like Cov will lose out because not only do they have existing connections that are good, but many commute to Birmingham CBD anyway. As for the line only going to Birmingham...it has to start somewhere; not intended to finish there, not to mention the fact that any journey reduction to Birmingham will carry through to an extent to other destinations further north...why do anti HS2 people fail to see this?!

This argument is as much about complicated urban geography that has changed vastly from the old definitions of what is and is not a city and how it functions. HS2 should hold its line, London - Birmingham - Manchester, branching to Sheffield and Leeds from Birmingham too. London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds are the biggest CBD's and carry the most IC traffic, therefore it seems logical that this is where you want to take the strain away from the conventional network and go like hell if you're building a new line that would make Brunel proud.

I'm not entirely sure I agree. Firstly, there's the obvious point that trains can leave high-speed lines for the standard network at various places (Leeds would be a good one for that); and, secondly, there's the argument that there should be "collector" stations out in the suburbs. We already have three, Stratford, Ebbsfleet and Ashford. Not very successful, I have to say, but they are there and that is the point. For a short line to Birmingham, that is not very important, but a longer route to Scotland might be more important. For an east coast route, Cambridge might be an important collector, since it is easy to access from East Anglia, the King's Cross suburban lines and Stansted Airport. There's no need for everything to stop there to provide a suburban service, in fact, northbound trains might be pick-up only (which might actually be enforceable on a new line). Any spare paths could be used by, say, a Norwich service running along an electrified route from Ely.

 

[Bonemaster]

but you won't find any urban geographer now that seriously believes Coventry isn't subservient to Birmingham's city centre and I hate to say it...it will never be a competitive city in its own right again because of the way cbd domination has developed through human behaviour.

Coventry is far from subservient to Birmingham, it has as many large company HQs as Birmingham, and the fact is that Coventry has a larger employed population than people who live there, hardly subservient but an economic centre in its own right with a totally different economic catchment zone for labour. In fact Coventry's economy is more closely linked to the Warwickshire area and areas of Western Leicestershire, I would go so far as to say comments around Coventry being subservient to Birmingham are both ignorant of the facts and show a distinct lack of in depth knowledge above what would be taught in generic GCSE geography, there is more to an economy and what needs to be served than a few high towers in a central business district. And as for the claim of house sellers giving traveling times to London when purchasing houses in Coventry is just pure total and complete rubbish, when I purchased my house not once did I see a traveling time to London, on anything I was given.

It is no accident that the largest employment centres are closely linked to transport links to the capital take a look at both West Yorkshire and the North East, where the significant cities of Bradford and Sunderland suffer massively from a lack of transport links to the capital compared to the more dominant local commerce centres of Leeds and Newcastle. Commerce centres have not developed through human behavior but by the availability of transport links, access to technology and by the availability and concentration of a workforce.

HS2 will make cities that it bypasses subservient to other cities, decimating there own rail services, making it hard to attract inwards investment, breading a circle of decline, unemployment and longer commutes to fewer more congested regional business districts, which in my opinion will create a net increase in CO2 and decline in air quality as people are forced to commute longer distances to work. Something that no HS2 study has looked into, or if they have they dont want to tell us about it.

I'm not even convinced the line will be attractive to people from the greater Birmingham area, with both higher fares, and a cross station to contend with thus negating any time saving of the new line.

The problem of the route and where it stops is simply not going to go away and sadly I believe the entire concept of a high speed line serving a small number of locations within a country the size of ours the concept is massively flawed, as it stands the public is against it (as shown by a recent poll for ITV by 4 to 1), the project is in almost complete isolation from the existing network, serving new build stations that dont connect in with classic lines, that even French TGV routes only did by exception. If we do not ever progress the rest of the way to Scotland we will have the most expensive white elephant service that as a country we can not afford, whilst we are cutting police, healthcare and eduction. A fast train service that will serve a such a small minority of the country is just not a priority

As much as I am pro-rail, and that I do not expect to be in the majority or even popular on a rail forum with my opinions, but my opinions are based upon what I believe will be the impacts across Coventry and the North Warwickshire area (and will spread to other major cities if we progress further north) that will not only be damaged by the building of the line but decimated as jobs and employment are sucked away, and peoples lifestyles and jobs are more important to me than having a very fast shiny new railway. The WCML upgrade I do not believe is an option either, we need a new line to connect large population centres that are either suffering from insufficient capacity or simply not connected to the capital because of changes that have occurred in this country since the existing lines were built in the Victorian era.

 

[Greenback]

I agree more with Bonemaster than RichW1.

Centralisation and regionalisation is not sustainable long term. HS2 will certainly help to concentrate economic activity in the places that it directly serves. This can only undermine the economies of places that it does not serve.

I've never been convinced of the economic benefits of HS2. The only benefit I can see is the additional capacity.

 

[Teaboy1]

It is an impressive array, just a quick calculation (16 000 x 0.18kW = 2880 kW) so that's a theoretical class 66 of instantaneous power ........... at midday .... in high summer ... for about a few hours .....then dropping off rapidly as the sun goes down ........... and will require a lot of maintenance however !!

Expensive though but it's a help in the long run so expect we shall see more while the UK government wants to reduce CO2 by subsidising solar panel arrays.

 

[IanXC]

It is an impressive array, just a quick calculation (16 000 x 0.18kW = 2880 kW) so that's a theoretical class 66 of instantaneous power ........... at midday .... in high summer ... for about a few hours .....then dropping off rapidly as the sun goes down ........... and will require a lot of maintenance however !!

Expensive though but it's a help in the long run so expect we shall see more while the UK government wants to reduce CO2 by subsidising solar panel arrays.

You'd be surprised what energy can be captured even when it isn't "a few hours at midday in high summer". I guess this isn't directly comparable as its hot water rather than electricity, but my parents' house has been successfully generating its own hot water since mid February without any other heat source being used. If its light then thats enough.

 

[LE Greys]

I agree more with Bonemaster than RichW1.

Centralisation and regionalisation is not sustainable long term. HS2 will certainly help to concentrate economic activity in the places that it directly serves. This can only undermine the economies of places that it does not serve.

I've never been convinced of the economic benefits of HS2. The only benefit I can see is the additional capacity.

I don't know much about Dijon. Can anyone confirm whether being missed out by LGV Sud-Est has made a serious impact on the local economy?