High Speed rail link the arguments are all against.
The distances involved, the economics, the damage to the landscape and the grief to residents mean that some other way of improving North South transport would be preferable to this. Such as improving the existing service and making it cheaper than flying.
Opponents of the line have already succeeded in having various alterations made to the proposed plan, including expensive tunnels in the Chilterns: but the Government seems not to want to entertain the idea of expanding and improving existing lines, which could be done at a small fraction of the cost and with far less disruption.
Despite the rhetoric, theres only saving of a few minutes saved on the journey.
Even if these lines are built, who is to say that their effect will not be to get people more from the North to London, rather than from London to the North? Won't they take a lot of highly paid workers out of jobs in Birmingham, and Manchester, while they whizz down their taxpayer-subsidised railway to work every day in London? Why is the Government so certain that this plan will boost the economies in those cities?
HS2 is based on very large forecast increase in the demand for travel by all modes of transport. This included a 44% increase in long distance car trips by 2033 and a 178% increase in domestic air travel. The impact of HSR on getting people out of cars and plans is minimal. The forecast is an 8% shift from air to HSR and an 8% shift from car to HSR.
Will the high speed line cut carbon emissions? No.
HS2 Ltd tells us it will be broadly carbon neutral (HS2’s Report paragraph 4.2.31)
HS2 trains are fuel-hungry – planned to travel at 225mph, subsequently rising to 250mph. Trains travelling at 225mph use 50% more energy than trains travelling at 186mph.
Source: Campaign for Protection of Rural England. See Getting Back on Track page 18.
An intercity electric train (not HSR) produces 29 grammes of CO2 per passenger km but the HSR train produces 65 grammes.
Source: “To shift or not to shift”, CE, Delft, the Netherlands
The Wildlife Trusts’ website states that between London and Birmingham HS2 will impact directly on two Wildlife Trust Nature Reserves, four sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs), 10 ancient woodland sites and 53 Local Wildlife Sites or potential Local Wildlife Sites.
The construction and operating costs of phase 1 (London to Birmingham) total £25.5 billion but will only generate £15 billion of extra fares, requiring an £11.9 billion subsidy.
Hs2 is a “rich person’s railway”. The business case assumes that 30% of the passengers will earn more than £70,000 pa.
For an alleged cost of £32 billion over 21 years I want to see something that will help people, not make things worse.
the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) have labelled the consultation process for High Speed 2 as a complete train wreck.
Elinor Ostrom’s pragmatism:4:30pm, May 29th, 2018 Bush House North East Wing, Kings College, University of London - ‘He was, indeed, in the habit of always comparing what he heard or read with an already familiar canon, and felt his admiration quicken if he could detect ...
1 week ago