High Speed 2 - do we really need it?

[route:oxford]

Coutts Bank isn't going to relocate to Rotherham.

Isn't it managed out of Edinburgh anyway?

 

[YesToHS2]

the WCRM was £8.6bn.

Every report and article puts the cost of the WCML works at £12 to 13bn and 10 years to complete. Which is neither here nor there. As stated a massive amount of work has been carried out on the WCML so there simply isn't much more than can be done other than tweaking signalling and creating a couple more grade separated junctions. The first phase of tweaks alone would cost £3bn which wouldn't increase line speed or capacity significantly.

 

[Metroland]

But having a direct and quick railway line into central London does not in itself create prosperity.

No, but it's an ingredient, as is the local labour market, whether it's a nice place to live, costs of offices and factories and other factors.

The relationship between transport connectivity and economic growth isn't disputed, what is disputed is how much growth and the overall effect. Which is why these things are always best debated among transport planners and economists, rather than on rail enthusiasts forums or NIMBY websites.

I'd point you to this website

http://www.greengauge21.net/publications/consequences-for-employment-and-economic-growth/#more-169

Coutts Bank isn't going to relocate to Rotherham.

No but the bank of England did relocate to Leeds, and business will only re-locate if a place has good transport connections.

 

[Philip Elliott]

Every report and article puts the cost of the WCML works at £12 to 13bn and 10 years to complete.

Sorry, but that is rubbish - you're probably looking at projected costs before the SRA reigned in the costs.

As stated a massive amount of work has been carried out on the WCML so there simply isn't much more than can be done other than tweaking signalling and creating a couple more grade separated junctions. The first phase of tweaks alone would cost £3bn which wouldn't increase line speed or capacity significantly.

Plenty more can be done:-

Stafford bypass
4-track Brinklow - Attleborough
6-track Watford - Milton Keynes (with 6-tracking, 2 tracks can be left open for almost all the time so far less disruption)
4-track Canley - Lea hall
Line speed enhancements in Cumbria
ERTMS

With the Peterborough - Nuneaton upgrade, many container trains will no longer need to use the West Coast south freeing up capacity.

 

[brianthegiant]

In many ways, HS1 has shown us cynical brits what is possible for an international railway line in terms of speed, reliability, quietness & smoothness of ride, (shortly also spaciousness of the carriages once the E320s are commissioned). I personally think there is a change in public attitudes to rail travel, and the railways aren't as maligned as they used to be, but there is still a long way to go.
High speed 2, once built, will demonstrate that these standards are also possible for a domestic railway line. Don't underestimate the influence of step-change benchmarking projects and their impact on public opinion. Maintaining public support is essential to sustain a transport policy with a strong rail focus into the future.
I remain convinced that a high speed backbone is ESSENTIAL to the long term development of our victorian rail network, to complement classic line upgrades.

 

[gordonthemoron]

HS1 is also quiet, NIMBYs in the Cotswolds please take note

 

[The Planner]

Plenty more can be done:-

Stafford bypass

Waste of cash and time, it will cost a ridiculous amount of money for 3 minutes at best. Grade seperate Colwich and Norton Bridge and you could get the same savings through the timetable.

4-track Brinklow - Attleborough

is a no brainer and should be done asap.

6-track Watford - Milton Keynes (with 6-tracking, 2 tracks can be left open for almost all the time so far less disruption)

2 tracks are always left open even in engineering possessions, doesnt help you South of Watford or North of the Keynes. Can't see the point to be honest.

4-track Canley - Lea hall

Was always going to be Stechford to Beechwood tunnel. Something needs doing but unlikely to ever happen.

With the Peterborough - Nuneaton upgrade, many container trains will no longer need to use the West Coast south freeing up capacity.

Which helps the case against a lot of what has been suggested !!

 

[j0hn0]

Waste of cash and time, it will cost a ridiculous amount of money for 3 minutes at best. Grade seperate Colwich and Norton Bridge and you could get the same savings through the timetable.


is a no brainer and should be done asap.


2 tracks are always left open even in engineering possessions, doesnt help you South of Watford or North of the Keynes. Can't see the point to be honest.



Was always going to be Stechford to Beechwood tunnel. Something needs doing but unlikely to ever happen.



Which helps the case against a lot of what has been suggested !!

So, considering what still remains to be done Phillip, do you still think that 10 years and 10 - 15 bn is value for money?

Yes we can all list the things that we would like to see improved, as has been done in another thread, but realistically, the things you list, would cost way, way in excess of even the so called "upgrade" of the WCML.

Plus 1 late train on the WCML and all other services have to catch up or be cancelled.

Build a new line and you have all the "Upgrades" already there, plus the massive capacity release on the classic line and a top speed of 250mph

Can someone please actually give a decent reason for not wanting HS2?

The government IS going ahead with it BECAUSE of the farcical WCML upgrade, especially seeing as most of the benefits aren't really tangible to most.

 

[Philip Elliott]

2 tracks are always left open even in engineering possessions, doesnt help you South of Watford or North of the Keynes. Can't see the point to be honest.

The main benefit would be to move the 2 LM services per hour off the fast lines which then frees up the xx.33 & xx.57 paths and spaces for others plus allowing the LMs to run in the peak. Track capacity isn't much of an issue north of the Keynes as long as the services are already segregated on the right lines.

2 tracks are left open on all the maintenance possessions but you couldn't keep all lines open if you were widening a formation but going from 4 to 6, the line still operates unlike from 2 to 4 hence it would be far less disruptive.

South of Watford does need additional capacity but is obviously very expensive, the suggestions I gave were all in the several hundred million rather than several billion category.

The west coast south was still blocked on all lines for 4 days this year but amazingly the trent has stayed open all days!

As far as Stafford goes it depends whether it or widening Colwich - Stafford is the best option. It could well be the case that the 'bypass' runs from Colwich to Madeley with graded junctions put in and a replacement junction for Stone.

So, considering what still remains to be done Phillip, do you still think that 10 years and 10 - 15 bn is value for money?

I don't believe any work started before 2000? As i said it was £8.6bn of which most had to be spent any way. It was a badly run project and won't happen like that again (we hope!!). Do you think spending £32 bn on a route that will have insufficient capacity for the initial timetable is good value for money?

 

[TheBigD]

With the Peterborough - Nuneaton upgrade, many container trains will no longer need to use the West Coast south freeing up capacity.

And watch the PPM figures go down hill on the New Street-Stansted run!

 

[j0hn0]

I don't believe any work started before 2000? As i said it was £8.6bn of which most had to be spent any way. It was a badly run project and won't happen like that again (we hope!!). Do you think spending £32 bn on a route that will have insufficient capacity for the initial timetable is good value for money?

Now you're just making things up to try and prove a point that just doesn't stand.

"It won't happen again" - the funniest thing I have read on this forum for a while

And in terms of work starting before 2000, have you ever heard of planning? feasability studies?

Honestly, give it up mate

 

[Philip Elliott]

Can someone please actually give a decent reason for not wanting HS2?

A very quick summary:

The business case is non existant - a 200% increase in demand is fantasy figures
The money is needed elsewhere
The current plans will lead to a decrease in capacity, speed and frequency for many town and cities
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And in terms of work starting before 2000, have you ever heard of planning? feasability studies?

And that caused disruption to passenger services??? You do realise that HS1 planning started in the 1980s? Or maybe even the 1970s.

And watch the PPM figures go down hill on the New Street-Stansted run!

As a commuter from Narborough to Birmingham I am dreading it, performance is sh*t now with the current freight. The 16.22 to Stansted is the worst, the path doesn't work when the Carlisle - Mountsorrel ballast empties runs.

 

[caliwag]

It seems to me that all the pro HS rail pundits are overlooking the fact that by the time it's built, even to Birmingham, though why Birmingham is that important is difficult to perceive, the whole business world will have changed dramatically. I defy anyone on here to predict how the business world will have evolved, to say nothing of the technology.

Will, so called, business boys n' girls still be bombing around the country wasting time drinking coffee in crap hotels?...no they will be working a lot smarter if they know what's good for them and their profits.

Sure, there will be small company interaction...visiting fabrication works, building sites, new premises, etc etc but I do not think it will be seen as at all efficient to send highly paid geezers and geezerettes around the country, even less the world...bye bye A380s!

Now granny, aunty, student sons and daughters et al will still love the train (regardless of speed) and that's where the real railway works...walk-on, pre-booking...who cares it'll work and be affordable.

I just do not see the point of bu**ering up the countryside, to say nothing of the environment, for something which no-one will be able to afford. I ask again, who are the 20,000 people an hour that want to travel from London to Birmingham...train 3-4 mins headway carrying a potential 1000 punters. They have to be near full to pay for thgemselves!!!

 

[The Planner]

The 16.22 to Stansted is the worst, the path doesn't work when the Carlisle - Mountsorrel ballast empties runs.

The signallers must think it does, never seen a QA delay for it. PPM shouldnt take a hit, there are several un-used strategic freight paths which trains will just slot into.

 

[TheBigD]

The signallers must think it does, never seen a QA delay for it. PPM shouldnt take a hit, there are several un-used strategic freight paths which trains will just slot into.

I used to work the 1622 regularly.

It gets an appalling run between New Street and Leicester and is regularly delayed a few minutes. And being booked just a 2 car means it's overcrowded (crush loaded out of Leicester at 1717) so you struggle to make up any lost time. When the freight doesn't run you usually get into Leicester 5 minutes early. You regularly run on yellows from Nuneaton to Knighton. As it's given 17 minutes to do Audley End-Stansted (12 minute run) it usually gets to Stansted on time.

Sorry to bore you all!!!

 

[Grumpy]

Metroland
There is nothing in your link to justify the argument that the High speed line will reduce the North/South divide. Your reference to this being too difficult a subject to be discussed on mere "rail enthusiasts forums or NIMBY websites"rather suggests that you cant explain it or cant understand either.

You also refer to the Bank of England having relocated to Leeds. Well they have had an operation in Leeds for over 100 years so I dont think you can claim them having some staff in Leeds as being in anticipation of the HS route. The vast majority of their staff are still based in London. In fact this is a good illustration of the issue-the Leeds operation is mainly about note handling in the North of England ie lowly graded back office stuff, whilst the high paid jobs are all in London. The new line isn't likely to affect this one jot.

 

[imagination]

It seems to me that all the pro HS rail pundits are overlooking the fact that by the time it's built, even to Birmingham, though why Birmingham is that important is difficult to perceive, the whole business world will have changed dramatically. I defy anyone on here to predict how the business world will have evolved, to say nothing of the technology.

Will, so called, business boys n' girls still be bombing around the country wasting time drinking coffee in crap hotels?...no they will be working a lot smarter if they know what's good for them and their profits.

Sure, there will be small company interaction...visiting fabrication works, building sites, new premises, etc etc but I do not think it will be seen as at all efficient to send highly paid geezers and geezerettes around the country, even less the world...bye bye A380s!

Now granny, aunty, student sons and daughters et al will still love the train (regardless of speed) and that's where the real railway works...walk-on, pre-booking...who cares it'll work and be affordable.

I just do not see the point of bu**ering up the countryside, to say nothing of the environment, for something which no-one will be able to afford. I ask again, who are the 20,000 people an hour that want to travel from London to Birmingham...train 3-4 mins headway carrying a potential 1000 punters. They have to be near full to pay for thgemselves!!!

While it isnt easy to say what the business world will be like I very much doubt that travel will cease. It certainly isn't just drinking coffee in crap hotels. My uncle was a very high payed businessman (until he voluntarily left his company a few months ago) and spent almost his entire life travelling around the place both within Britain and internationally. But this WAS working - making business deals and keeping the company running properly.

Also, you seem to be running on the assumption that the line will only be running in one direction, which is proposterous. It's not just people in London wanting to go to Birmingham. It's also people from Birmingham wanting to go to London. And don't try saying there isn't demand for THAT...

Plus, while the business world may well have changed, there's also a good chance that oil will be becoming far more expensive, making people who at the moment would do the journey by car take the train instead. Of course, electric cars will probably become more common, but most of them still use oil too, and those that don't (with a tiny number of extremely expensive exceptions that show no sign at the moment of becoming more widely available) couldn't last between London and Birmingham and back.

Finally, it probably wont just be the people doing London-Birmingham or Birmingham-London that will gain. Taking people onto the new line will likely reduce the demand for the service on existing lines, reducing congestion and freeing up much needed capacity. Sure if this was the only aim it could be done better in other ways, but it remains as a benefit of HS2.

 

[rb311]

Caliwag speaks a lot of sense. Who knows that anyone will want to travel between London and Birmingham, let alone Leeds, Manchester, Glasgow, after acre upon acre of virgin countryside of outstanding natural beauty is laid waste to chase a muscle flexing dream by the rail industry.

Oil may become more expensive over the next 20 years but what fuel is going to be used to generate the electricity to power this wunder trains?

Incidently to someone else who wants to let the good people of the Cotswolds know that the HS1 is allegedly quiet, it's the Chilterns that are going to be ruined.

 

[tbtc]

It seems to me that all the pro HS rail pundits are overlooking the fact that by the time it's built, even to Birmingham, though why Birmingham is that important is difficult to perceive,

if HS2 doesn't run between London and Birmingham, which other two major places would you build it between? Skipton and Colne?

 

[rb311]

if HS2 doesn't run between London and Birmingham, which other two major places would you build it between? Skipton and Colne?

Err I think the point could be... don't build it.

 

[ainsworth74]

Oil may become more expensive over the next 20 years but what fuel is going to be used to generate the electricity to power this wunder trains?

I would expect coal, gas, nuclear fuel and renewables just like we always have used in this country. Oil makes up a tiny percentage of electricity generation in this country.

 

[Lampshade]

Err I think the point could be... don't build it.

This.

The journey time from London to Birmingham is pretty quick anyway, then factor in the HS terminals won't be in the city centres (where would you build the HS terminal in London?). All things considered, including time getting to and from the HS terminals - would a high speed line between London and Birmingham be as spectacularly brilliant as people are making out?

Scenario:

Businessman in Birmingham needs to be at a conference in the City of London in two hours sharp. He walks the short distance to New Street, hops on the first Pendolino, 1h24m to Euston then a quick hop on the Underground to Bank, he's there with 15 minutes to spare to have some lunch.

Scenario 2:

Businessman in Birmingham needs to be at a conference in the City of London in two hours sharp. He takes a taxi to the High Speed terminal in God only knows where (say, 20 minutes), hops on the first train going (they probably won't be VHF like Virgin), 49m to Euston then the Underground to Bank, he's there about ten minutes earlier than his non-high speed travelling counterpart but he's paid for a much more expensive ticket and paid for the taxi in Birmingham.

London to Glasgow will be much much much better for high speed, if it reduces journey times enough it'll destroy the domestic air market for that route.

 

[tbtc]

The journey time from London to Birmingham is pretty quick anyway

Its not just about speed though, its about capacity, and avoiding the problems that beset the WCML upgrade

London to Glasgow will be much much much better for high speed, if it reduces journey times enough it'll destroy the domestic air market for that route.

Yes, but (unless you are going to build a 400 mile railway overnight) the logical way to do it is to build London - Birmingham, then extend to Manchester, then extend further north (etc etc).

 

[Lampshade]

Its not just about speed though, its about capacity, and avoiding the problems that beset the WCML upgrade

In that case they should be sorting out the capacity problems rather than simply building round them. What happens when the WCML becomes full again, do they then build HS3, HS4? How about a quadruple-decker high speed line, sixteen tracks over four levels all going to Birmingham.

If the problem is capacity alone, I agree there should be more lines built but not necessarily high speed, more standard lines integrated with the current system, maybe even some more terminal stations in major cities but the current system needs to be sorted out before high speed is even considered, it's a luxury at best.

 

[Metroland]

Metroland
There is nothing in your link to justify the argument that the High speed line will reduce the North/South divide. Your reference to this being too difficult a subject to be discussed on mere "rail enthusiasts forums or NIMBY websites"rather suggests that you cant explain it or cant understand either.

There's a lot of evidence to say the HS2 line would reduce the north south divide, please read the employment report on http://www.greengauge21.net/ among others.

There's 100% no point in discussing things on enthusiast forums. No offence, but most enthusiasts have very shaky knowledge of real railway operations, let alone deep post graduate transport planning and economic qualifications.

It's not to say you cannot formulate an opinion based on the evidence of the experts, and indeed, I do all the time and try to cite this. What I have an objection to is people that form opinions based on no research, no experience, no references, merely based on the fact they have an ideological bent against something.

Once people start stating 'There is no evidence', when researchers and academics state there is, and insist 'They know best', the discussion is over as it's pointless.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Caliwag speaks a lot of sense. Who knows that anyone will want to travel between London and Birmingham, let alone Leeds, Manchester, Glasgow, after acre upon acre of virgin countryside of outstanding natural beauty is laid waste to chase a muscle flexing dream by the rail industry.
.

I suspect they said that in 1825 as well, and in the 1950s and 1960s about motorways and more recently about airports.

Personally I think we shouldn't travel at all, sit on farms chewing the ends of straw and live in perfect ignorance

 

[j0hn0]

Lets start arguing the "true cost" of a mars bar instead shall we?

 

[The Planner]

Businessman in Birmingham needs to be at a conference in the City of London in two hours sharp. He takes a taxi to the High Speed terminal in God only knows where (say, 20 minutes)

Next door to Moor St, so a 5-7 minute walk from New St then...

 

[VirginTrainFreak]

to be honest i think the HS2 Will be a waste of money and they probly would charge ridiculous prices

 

[Metroland]

I think one of the things the government fears is the UK is going to get left behind. Other countries will have superior transport, connecting their principal cities, industry and international gateways.

http://www.uic.org/spip.php?article573

Figures: Max speed km/h, year opened, length km

HIGH SPEED LINES IN THE WORLD

Updated 21 May 2010

Lines or sections of lines in which operation V > 250 km/h1
EUROPE

BELGIUM

In operation:
Brussels – French Border (L1) 300 1997 72
Leuven – Liège (L2) 300 2002 65
Liège – German Border (L3) 260 2009 36
Antwerp – Dutch border (L4) 300 2009 36
Total km = 209

FRANCE

In operation:
LGV Paris Sud Est 300 1981 / 1983 419
LGV Atlantique 300 1989 / 1990 291
LGV Contournement Lyon 300 1992 / 1994 121
LGV Nord – Europe 300 1994 / 1996 346
LGV Interconnexion IDF 300 1994 / 1996 104
LGV Méditerranée 320 2001 259
LGV Est 320 2007 332
Total km = 1872

Under construction:
(Figueres -) Frontière – Perpignan 300 2010 24
Contournement Nîmes – Montpellier 300 2012 70
LGV Dijon – Mulhouse 320 2012 140
Total km = 234

Planned:
LGV Sud Europe Atlantique S 2013 120
LGV Bretagne – Pays de la Loire 2013 188
LGV Est – Européenne (Second phase) 2014 / 2015 100
LGV Poitiers – Limoges 2015 115
LGV Sud Europe Atlantique N 2016 180
LGV Bordeaux – Toulouse 2016 230
LGV Rhin – Rhône Br Est (Second phase) 2015 / 2020 48
LGV PACA 2020 200
Interconnexion Sud IDF 2020 40
LGV Bordeaux – Espagne 2020 230
LGV Lyon – Turin 2020 150
LGV Montpellier – Perpignan 2022 150
LGV Picardie 2022 250
LGV Rhin – Rhône Branche S 2022 100
LGV Rhin – Rhône Branche Ouest 2022 85
LGV Paris – Lyon bis 2025 430
Total km = 2616

GERMANY

In operation:
Fulda – Würzburg 280 1988 90
Hannover – Fulda 280 1991 / 1994 248
Mannheim – Stuttgart 280 1985 / 1991 109
Hannover (Wolfsburg) – Berlin 250 1998 189
Köln – Frankfurt 300 2002 / 2004 197
Köln – Düren 250 2003 42
(Karlsruhe -) Rastatt – Offenburg 250 2004 44
Leipzig – Gröbers (- Erfurt) 250 2004 24
Hamburg – Berlin 230 2004 253
Nürenberg – Ingolstadt 300 2006 89
Total km = 1285

Under construction:
München – Augsburg 230 2010 62
(Leipzig/Halle -) Gröbers – Erfurt 300 2015 98
Nürnberg – Erfurt 250 2017 218
Total km = 378

Planned:
(Karlsruhe -) Offenburg – Basel 250 112
Frankfurt – Mannheim 300 81
Stuttgart – Ulm – Augsburg 250 166
Hamburg/Bremen – Hannover 300 114
(Hannover -) Seelze – Minden 230 71
(Frankfurt -) Hanau – Fulda/Würzburg 300 126
Total km = 670

ITALY

In operation:
Rome – Florence (First section) 250 1981 150
Rome – Florence (Second section) 250 1984 74
Rome – Florence (Third section) 250 1992 24
Rome – Naples 300 2006 220
Turin – Novara 300 2006 94
Milan – Bologna 300 2008 182
Novara – Milan 300 2009 55
Florence – Bologna 300 2009 77
Naples – Salerno 250 2009 47
Total km = 923

Planned:
Milan – Venice 245
Genoa – Milan 150
Total km = 395

THE NETHERLANDS
In operation:

Schiphol – Rotterdam– Belgian Border 300 2009 120

POLAND
Planned:
Warsaw – Lodz – Wroclaw – Poznan 300 2015 500
Warsaw – Ktowice / Krakow 300 2015 212
Total km = 712

PORTUGAL
Planned:
Lisboa – Caia (- Madrid) 350 2013 206
Porto – Valença (- Vigo) first phase 250 2013 55
Lisboa – Porto 300 2015 290
Porto – Valença (- Vigo) second phase 250 45
Aveiro – Almeida (- Salamanca) 250 170
Evora – Faro – Vila Real de SA (- Huelva) 250 240
Total km = 1006

RUSSIA

Moscow – St. Petersburg 300 650

SPAIN

In operation:

Madrid – Seville 270 1992 471
Madrid – Lleida 300 2003 519
Zaragoza – Huesca 200 2003 79
(Madrid -) La Sagra – Toledo 250 2005 21
Córdoba – Antequera 300 2006 100
Lleida – Camp de Tarragona 300 2006 82
Madrid – Segovia – Valladolid 300 2007 184
Antequera – Málaga 300 2007 55
Camp de Tarragona – Barcelona 300 2008 88
By pass Madrid 200 2009 5
Total km = 1604

Under construction:
Madrid-Valencia / Albacete 300 2010 432
Figueres – Frontera (- Perpignan) 300 2010 20
Barcelona – Figueres 300 2010 / 2012 132
(Madrid-) Alicante / Murcia / Castellón 300 2012 470
Vitoria – Bilbao – San Sebastián 250 2012 175
Variante de Pajares 250 2012 50
Ourense – Santiago 300 2012 88
Bobadilla – Granada 250 2012 109
La Coruña – Vigo 250 2012 158
Navalmoral – Cáceres – Badajoz – Fr. Port. 300 278
Sevilla – Cádiz 250 152
Hellín – Cieza (Variante de Camarillas) 250 27
Sevilla – Antequera 300 128
Total km = 2219

Planned:
Valladolid – Burgos – Vitoria 300 211
Venta de Baños – León – Asturias 238
Madrid – Navalmoral de la Mata 300 191
Almería – Murcia 190
Valencia – Castellón 64
Olmedo – Zamora – Orense 300 2012 323
Palencia – Santander 300 201
Zaragoza – Castejón – Logroño 250 149
Castejón – Pamplona 300 75
Orense – Vigo (vía Cerdedo) 250 60
Total km = 1702
SWEDEN

Planned:
Stockholm – Malmö / Goteborg 300 750

SWITZERLAND

In operation:
Frutigen – Visp (Lötschberg base tunnel) 250 2007 35

Under construction:
Erstfeld – Biasca (Gotthard base tunnel) 250 2017 57
Giubiasco – Lugano (Ceneri base tunnel) 250 2019 15
Total km = 72

UNITED KINGDOM
In operation:
Fawkham Junction – Tunnel 300 2003 74
London – Southfleet Junction 300 2007 39
Total km = 113

TOTAL KM EUROPE:
In operation = 6161
Under construction = 2903
Planned = 8501
Total Europe 2025 = 17565

ASIA

CHINA

In operation:

Beijing – Tianjing 350 2008 120
Jinan – Qingdao 200 2008 362
Nanjing – Hefei 250 2008 166
Hefei – Wuhan 200 2008 356
Shijiazhuang – Taiyuan 200 2009 190
Wuhan – Guangzhou 350 2009 968
Ningbo – Wenzhou– Fuzhou 250 2009 562
Zhengzhou – Xi’an 350 2010 458
Fuzhou – Xiamen 250 2010 275
Chengdu – Dujiangyan 250 2010 72
Total km = 3529

Under construction:
Guangzhou – ShenZhen (Xianggang) 350 2010 104
Nanchang – Jiujiang 200 2010 92
Changchun – Jilin 200 2010 96
Guangzhou – Zhuhai（ include Extend Line） 200 20102 142
Hainan east circle 200 2010 308
Shanghai – Nanjing 300 2010 300
Wuhan – Yichang 300 2011 293
Beijing – Shanghai 350 2011 1318
Tianjin – Qinhuangdao 350 2011 261
Nanjing – Hangzhou 350 2011 249
Shanghai – Hangzhou– Ningbo 300 2011 300
Hefei – Bengbu 300 2011 131
Mianyang – Chengdu– Leshan 250 2012 316
Xiamen – Shenzhen 200 2012 502
Beijing – Wuhan 350 2012 1122
Haerbin – Dalian 350 2012 904
Nanjing – An’qing 200 2012 258
Total km = 6696

Planned:
Tianjin – Yujiabu 300 2010 45
Wuhan – Xiaogan 200 2011 55
Wuhan – Huangshi 250 2011 84
Tianjin – Bazhou– Baoding 200 2012 145
Xuzhou – Zhengzhou 300 2012 343

Jinzhou – Yingkou 200 2012 100
Haerbin – Qiqihaer 250 2012 281
Xi’an – Baoji 300 2012 150
Shenyang – Dandong 200 2012 230
Shijiazhuang – Hengshui（ section of Taiyuan – Qingdao） 300 2012 100
Hangzhou – Changsha 300 2012 880
Qingdao – Rongcheng 200 2012 250
Guangxi Northern Gulf 200 2012 238
Total km = 2901

TAIWAN-CHINA

In operation:
Taipei – Kaohsiung 300 2007 345

INDIA
Planned:
Mumbai – Amehdabad 250 495

IRAN
Planned:
Tehran – Isfahan 250 475

JAPAN
In operation:
Tokyo – Osaka (Tokaido) 270 1964 515
Osaka – Okayama (San-yo) 270 1972 161
Okayama – Hakata (San-yo) 300 1975 393
Omiya – Morioka (Tohoku) 275 1982 465
Omiya – Niigata (Joetsu) 240 1982 270
Ueno – Omiya 110 1985 27
Tokyo – Ueno 110 1991 4
[Fukushima – Yamagata (Yamagata) 130 1992 MINI 87]
[Morioka – Akita (Akita) 130 1997 MINI 127]
Takasaki – Nagano (Hokuriku) 260 1997 117
[Yamagata – Shinjo (Yamagata) 130 1999 MINI 62]
Morioka – Hachinohe (Tohoku) 260 2002 97
Yatsuhiro – Kagoshima Chuo (Kyushu) 260 2004 127
Total km = 2452

Under construction:

Hachinohe – Shin Aomori (Tohoku) 2010 82
Hakata – Shin Yatsuhiro (Kyushu) 2011 130
Nagano – Kanazawa (Hokuriku) 2015 229
Shin Aomori – Shin Hakodate (Hokkaido) 2016 149
Total km = 590

Planned:
Shin Hakodate – Sapporo (Hokkaido) 211
Kanazawa – Osaka (Hokuriku) 254
Hakata – Nagasaki (Kyushu) 118
Total km = 583

SAUDI ARABIA

Planned:
Medina – Jeddah – Mecca 300 2015 550

SOUTH KOREA

In operation:
Seoul – Daegu 300 2004 330
Under construction:
Daegu – Pusan 300 82
TURKEY

In operation:
Ankara-Eskisehir 250 2009 235

Under construction:
Eskisehir-Đstanbul 250 2011 298
Ankara-Konya 250 2011 212
Total km = 510

Planned:
Ankara-Sivas 250 460
Ankara-Kayseri 250 175
Ankara-Đzmir 250 624
Bandırma-Bursa-Ayazma-Osmaneli 250 190
Halkalı-Bulgaria Border 250 230
Total km = 1.679
TOTAL KM ASIA:

In operation = 6891
Under construction = 7878
Planned = 6683
Total Asia 2025 = 21452

OTHER HIGH SPEED SYSTEMS

MOROCCO

Planned:
Tanger – Marrakech 300 2015 680

ARGENTINA

Planned:
Buenos Aires – Rosario 250 2020 315

BRAZIL

Planned:
Rio de Janeiro – Sao Paulo 300 2025 500

USA

In operation:

North East Corridor ([Boston –] NY – W) 240 362

Planned:

Los Angeles – Sacramento 300 2025 900

TOTAL KM OTHER COUNTRIES:
In operation = 362
Planned = 2395
Total other countries 2025 = 2757
TOTAL KM WORLD:
In operation = 13414
Under construction = 10781
Planned = 17579
Total World 2025 = 41774

 

[rb311]

would expect coal, gas, nuclear fuel and renewables just like we always have used in this country. Oil makes up a tiny percentage of electricity generation in this country.

All the nuclear power stations currently in use will be closed by 2023, with no replacements in build. For every windmill you need proper power generation back up. As to oil. It may make up a small proportion of the current generation fuel, but gas, which makes up the majority has it's price very closely linked to oil. As to coal, most is imported, which requires ships that when I last checked ran on oil to power them.

So oil prices will affect trains just as much as any other mode of transport

As to metroland's statements that this is too important and difficult a subject to be discussed here, he does admirably demonstrate that with his level of argument.

Personally I think we shouldn't travel at all, sit on farms chewing the ends of straw and live in perfect ignorance

I thought that's what you did already.